logging-log4j-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com>
Subject Re: porting log4j2 to .NET
Date Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:23:57 GMT
I agree.  I'm also one for not coding to the lowest common denominator.  That's one reason
we're not using a logging facade as I assume with a facade you get only the features that
are common across the set of logging frameworks the facade supports.


What I'm suggesting is to come up with a design and architecture which is language/runtime/OS
agnostic.  While it's easy for me to say that I wouldn't be surprised if it's more difficult
to achieve.  When it comes to implementation I would assume the features might manifest themselves
in different ways across the different languages/runtimes/OS's.  For instance, .NET has extension
methods and Java doesn't.  You might decide to implement some features in .NET using extension
methods and in Java you'll have to pick a different way to implement.  Configuration might
be another area where there are differences among the different runtimes and thus the implementation
might be a bit different.  Maybe there's even a feature that one implementation has that others
don't just because there is no way, or no easy enough way to implement.


Thanks,

Nick

________________________________
From: Mikael Ståldal <mikael.staldal@magine.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:04 AM
To: Log4J Users List
Subject: Re: porting log4j2 to .NET

Maybe I am nitpicking, but Log4j is also (mostly) agnostic to what language
you run on the JVM (Java, Scala, Groovy, Clojure, etc).

I guess it would be nice to have similar logging framework for other
runtimes (such as .Net). However, I would not like to constrain Log4j to
only use features available on both JVM and .Net.

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Nicholas Duane <nickdu@msn.com> wrote:

> I guess platform is vague.  Maybe I should have said language agnostic.
> It would be nice to have a single logging architecture/design run on C/C++,
> .NET, Java, etc.  Or at least it seems like a nice feature to me.  I would
> assume there are many enterprises out there that have applications running
> on different OS's and languages.  If I'm trying to pick a logging framework
> to use and I find a popular one which is capable and runs similarly across
> the OS's and languages then that's a big plus in my mind.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
> ________________________________
> From: Mikael Ståldal <mikael.staldal@magine.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 2:52 AM
> To: Log4J Users List
> Subject: Re: porting log4j2 to .NET
>
> Just to make things clear, Log4j is a logging framework for the JVM
> platform, and it is agnostic to the underlying OS. It it well tested on (at
> least) both Linux and Windows.
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:33 AM, Nicholas Duane <nickdu@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > Figured I would send this question out to the log4j side.  I have already
> > had some email exchanges with the log4net mailing list regarding porting
> > log4j2 to .NET.  My suggestion was that the apache logging framework be a
> > single architecture design which is platform agnostic and then teams
> which
> > port to the different platforms.  It seems log4net was a port of log4j
> and
> > may be going off in its own direction from that initial port.  My
> viewpoint
> > is that's a bad idea as one of the benefits I saw was that log4net was
> > similar to log4j2 and we're looking for logging frameworks for our
> > enterprise.  We have applications on both Windows/.NET and Linux/Java so
> > having a logging framework for Windows/.NET which is similar to a logging
> > framework for Linux/Java was a big plus.
> >
> >
> > While I have no doubt the effort to port log4j2 to .NET is considerable,
> > it would be a port and thus I'm not spending time figuring out design and
> > algorithms.  Would anyone want to venture a guess at what that effort
> might
> > be?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Nick
> >
>
>
>
> --
> [image: MagineTV]
>
> *Mikael Ståldal*
> Senior software developer
>
> *Magine TV*
> mikael.staldal@magine.com
> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com<<http://www.magine.com<>
> http://www.magine.com>
> [https://de.magine.com/content/uploads/2016/09/magine_global_social.png]<
> http://www.magine.com/>
>
> TV online with Magine TV<http://www.magine.com/>
> www.magine.com<http://www.magine.com>
> Watch the TV you love, on any device, anywhere in Germany and Sweden and
> find out more about our global OTT B2B solutions. Get started today.
>
>
>
> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not
> copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply
> email.
>



--
[image: MagineTV]

*Mikael Ståldal*
Senior software developer

*Magine TV*
mikael.staldal@magine.com
Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com<http://www.magine.com>

Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
(or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not
copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply
email.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message