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 6D8F5184EC for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 11:49:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 80209 invoked by uid 500); 19 Aug 2015 11:48:40 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4net-dev-archive@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 80165 invoked by uid 500); 19 Aug 2015 11:48:40 -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 80155 invoked by uid 99); 19 Aug 2015 11:48:40 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 11:48:40 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id A7F03182108 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 11:48:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.901 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.901 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=3, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-eu-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id acBI-X6iAEp1 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 11:48:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yk0-f175.google.com (mail-yk0-f175.google.com [209.85.160.175]) by mx1-eu-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-eu-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 77043214D1 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 11:48:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ykfw73 with SMTP id w73so1926145ykf.3 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 04:48:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=0p4pLp8muu6ApHfd9cj6IYmuWbhMElnsXSS8Umd806c=; b=Iirdd57YWpPBLBNK3vbK9YYdIhNqt6oxVPdq/dn6Wl4Pk/f/stpknXXa8lAWSCucge S3Se7qGsNHrq01WXddXmgydiF1J6R/vC9PTQhGfANSjHxUNMIn/8sxfrMEvGpneFqwTo RR0w+x1L6V28Q7G/y32GblDs2+NTAOJvA0qNa/ybClUEgRRzDqLAhcirLEqINjz1lYRf eXYL9lKhbDajOzqZHFtpM7Zv1Ly6P33sPDeJTRUuHDUzik13h63Iick3OBQpaJ0XhV7D 5+Z39S9EPUC785e8Yc1nQadCVWzSyYHAjpQTqWtgPqTdeAvG+21NUEl4Oz8EAYEU4IKv QTjg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.13.195.66 with SMTP id f63mr13079439ywd.107.1439984909475; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 04:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.37.89.131 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 04:48:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55D46294.6040800@vande.cz> References: <03be01d0da4f$a85aaa10$f90ffe30$@apache.org> <55D46294.6040800@vande.cz> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:48:29 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Log4net 2.0 From: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=8Dlson_Bolzan?= To: Log4NET Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114d5b9602e7a0051da89dd1 --001a114d5b9602e7a0051da89dd1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Agree. Will the code be compatible with the current version? On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Miroslav Vanick=C3=BD wrote: > Logging to MSSQL would be nice! > > > On 19.8.2015 12:56, Javier Sanchez wrote: > > Agree! > El ago. 19, 2015 3:21 AM, escribi=C3=B3: > >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Last night I=E2=80=99ve dreamed a dream and in that dream the release pr= ocess of >> log4net happened on a flick of a switch. Now that I=E2=80=99m awake agai= n I find >> the idea most pleasing and thus I=E2=80=99m bringing this idea to the de= v list [1]. >> >> >> >> My idea was that we should start off log4net2 =E2=80=9Cfrom scratch=E2= =80=9D that targets >> only .NET 4.0 [2] and does only what the largest part of people want fro= m >> it: >> >> >> >> 1. Log to console >> >> 2. Log to file [3] >> >> >> >> What can also be discussed is if log4net2 should get an interface to the >> existing appenders. >> >> >> >> Please discuss! >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Dominik >> >> >> >> [1] To make this come true there will be the need for a few helping hand= s >> and therefore this message goes to people that use log4net and want log4= net >> to be revived. >> >> [2] With .NET 4.0 we would still support good old WinXP and that should >> really be enough for today=E2=80=99s technology. >> >> [3] Yes, with rolling and there shouldn=E2=80=99t be a thousand possible >> combinations of configuration options. Stability and speed goes over >> functionality. >> >> >> > > -- --001a114d5b9602e7a0051da89dd1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Agr= ee.

Wil= l the code be compatible with the current version?

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 8:= 03 AM, Miroslav Vanick=C3=BD <miroslav.vanicky@vande.cz> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Logging to MSSQL would be nice!


On 19.8.2015 12:56, Javier Sanchez wrote:

Agree!

El ago. 19, 2015 3:21 AM, <dpsenner@apache.org> escribi=C3=B3:

Hi,

=C2=A0

Last night I=E2= =80=99ve dreamed a dream and in that dream the release process of log4net happened on a flick of a switch. Now that I=E2=80=99m awake again I find the idea most pleasing and= thus I=E2=80=99m bringing this idea to the dev list [1].

=C2=A0

My idea was that we should start off log4net2 =E2=80=9Cfrom scratch=E2=80= =9D that targets only .NET 4.0 [2] and does only what the largest part of people want from it:

=C2=A0

1.=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Log to console

2.=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Log to file [3]

=C2=A0

What can also be discussed is if log4net2 should get an interface to the existing appenders.

=C2=A0

Please discuss!

=C2=A0

Cheers,

Dominik

=C2=A0

[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.

[2] With .NET 4.0 we would still support good old WinXP and that should really be enough for today=E2=80=99s technology.

[3] Yes, with rolling and there shouldn=E2=80=99t be a thousand possibl= e combinations of configuration options. Stability and speed goes over functionality.

=C2=A0





--

--001a114d5b9602e7a0051da89dd1--