Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-logging-log4net-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4net-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1202C106EB for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 15:07:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 49262 invoked by uid 500); 26 Aug 2015 15:06:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4net-dev-archive@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 49222 invoked by uid 500); 26 Aug 2015 15:06:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact log4net-dev-help@logging.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: "Log4NET Dev" List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list log4net-dev@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 49206 invoked by uid 99); 26 Aug 2015 15:06:43 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 15:06:43 +0000 Received: from mail-ig0-f170.google.com (mail-ig0-f170.google.com [209.85.213.170]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id 92CD91A0175 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 15:06:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by igcse8 with SMTP id se8so42553983igc.1 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:06:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.30.197 with SMTP id u5mr11953755igh.9.1440601603012; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:06:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.221.131 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:06:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8761478d2c.fsf@v35516.1blu.de> References: <03be01d0da4f$a85aaa10$f90ffe30$@apache.org> <8761478d2c.fsf@v35516.1blu.de> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 17:06:42 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Log4net 2.0 From: Dominik Psenner To: Log4NET Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc11becf804e051e3832d7 --047d7bdc11becf804e051e3832d7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi again, I wanted this discussion to stay open for a week and that time is over now. For now I'll try to answer questions and clarify a few things so that you get another chance to raise your voice. > Will the code be compatible with the current version? The API should stay more or less the same, but eventually a few things will be dropped. Among them will be properties like IsDebugEnabled, which could be handled very well internally with late evaluation of log messages. > Just be bold and embrace .NET 4.5 I'm not at all against it, but there's almost no profit to target 4.5 over 4.0, but with 4.0 we have a much larger audience. Personally I do simply want the #ifdefs to be gone for good. That said, I've the impression that everything that doesn't fit into log4net core only with #ifdefs should be dropped. > Forget supporting the current appenders. > I would approve of dropping high complexity, low reward appenders like outdated .NET remoting. We will add filters and appenders that are easy to implement (or already there) for the targeted framework. To be honest, only what causes more trouble that it is worth will be dropped. :-) > What we do need with the appender interface is install/uninstall hooks. Nice idea. This will have to be worked out as early as possible such that the new API can be designed to fit the needs. > We also need to take ownership of nuget packaging log4net. This discussion is off topic and has already been dealt with. We simply cannot force the owner of the nuget package to work with us and that's it. > Personally I'd like to emphasize >> [1] To make this come true there will be the need for a few helping hands Thanks Justin, I'm glad that you're willing to lend a hand! Everyone else, please note that the more hands we can get, the faster and easier it is going to be. Thus, volunteers, jump out of your bushes! That's it from me, for now; 2015-08-22 19:09 GMT+02:00 Stefan Bodewig : > On 2015-08-19, wrote: > > > Last night I've dreamed a dream and in that dream the release process of > > log4net happened on a flick of a switch. > > A wonderful dream. > > Personally I'd like to emphasize > > > [1] To make this come true there will be the need for a few helping hands > > and therefore this message goes to people that use log4net and want > log4net > > to be revived. > > even stronger. > > Stefan > > -- > Dominik Psenner > > --047d7bdc11becf804e051e3832d7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi again,

I wanted this discussion to s= tay open for a week and that time is over now. For now I'll try to answ= er questions and clarify a few things so that you get another chance to rai= se your voice.

> Will the code be compatibl= e with the current version?

The API should stay mo= re or less the same, but eventually a few things will be dropped. Among the= m will be properties like IsDebugEnabled, which could be handled very well = internally with late evaluation of log messages.

&= gt;=C2=A0Just be bold and embr= ace .NET 4.5
=
I'm = not at all against it, but there's almost no profit to target 4.5 over = 4.0, but with 4.0 we have a much larger audience. Personally I do simply wa= nt the #ifdefs to be gone for good. That said, I've the impression that= everything that doesn't fit into log4net core only with #ifdefs should= be dropped.
=
>=C2= =A0Forget supporting th= e current appenders.
> I would approve of dropping high complexity, low reward append= ers like outdated .NET remoting.

We will= add filters and appenders that are easy to implement (or already there) fo= r the targeted framework. To be honest, only what causes more trouble that = it is worth will be dropped. :-)

>=C2=A0W= hat we do need with the appender interface is install/uninstall hooks.

=
Nice idea. This will have= to be worked out as early as possible such that the new API can be designe= d to fit the needs.

&= gt;=C2=A0We also need t= o take ownership of nuget packaging log4net.

This discussion is off topic and has already been= dealt with. We simply cannot force the owner of the nuget package to work = with us and that's it.

>=C2=A0Persona= lly I'd like to emphasize
>> [1] To make this come true there will be = the need for a few helping hands

Thanks Justin,= I'm glad that you're willing to lend a hand!
Everyone else, please note that the more hands we can g= et, the faster and easier it is going to be. Thus, volunteers, jump out of = your bushes!

Tha= t's it from me, for now;


2015-08-22 19:09 GMT+02:= 00 Stefan Bodewig <bodewig@apache.org>:
On 2015-08-19, <dpsenner@apache.org> wrote:

> Last night I've dreamed a dream and in that dream the release proc= ess of
> log4net happened on a flick of a switch.

A wonderful dream.

Personally I'd like to emphasize

> [1] To make this come true there will be the need for a few helping ha= nds
> and therefore this message goes to people that use log4net and want lo= g4net
> to be revived.

even stronger.

Stefan

--
Dominik Psenner

--047d7bdc11becf804e051e3832d7--