logging-log4net-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Towards 2.0.6
Date Mon, 07 Nov 2016 08:38:15 GMT
LOG4NET-487 is about the configuration option and the issue I would like 
to see in the release. The reason is, not having this configurable costs 
performance and creating a mutex always is troublesome to some 
configurations. The latter resulted in LOG4NET-506.

LOG4NET-506 is a bug report that comes from the fact that the appended 
filename is sometimes created by date patterns which are appended to the 
file property. Thus the mutex name is not a file path and produces an 
exception. The mutex name must be generated smarter to resolve that 
issue. However, if LOG4NET-487 was implemented then the reported issue 
could be worked around by setting the rolling lock to "lock" and thus 
would be gone because to the reporter every application is configured to 
log to separate logfiles.

On 2016-11-06 16:53, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> So this would be something you'd like to see adressed before the
> release, right?
> I think this is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4NET-485 which
> is linked by https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4NET-506 - only
> the later is still open.
> And there is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4NET-487
> LOG4NET-485 is resolved with fix version 1.2.14 and the correspondig
> commit (svn revision 1711838) really is part of 1.2.14.
> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/logging/log4net/tags/1.2.14/src/Appender/RollingFileAppender.cs?r1=1707180&r2=1711838
> Stefan
> On 2016-11-06, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>> We had introduced a mutex to secure rolling operations in the rolling file
>> appender. It would be nice if we could make the rolling locking
>> configurable (none, lock, mutex), defaulting to none. There should be an
>> issue for that, too.
>> On 6 Nov 2016 2:19 p.m., "Joe" <JocularJoe@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I just had a quick look through the commits since 1.2.15 and I don't see
>> anything that looks particularly risky.
>> I'd vote for cutting an RC.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>> Sent: 06 November 2016 11:14
>> To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org
>> Subject: Towards 2.0.6
>> Hi all
>> I'd like to get 2.0.6 released in order to help out people who want to use
>> log4net with .NET Core.
>> We've had some changes since I built the last test assemblies, but AFAIK
>> nobody has given them a try anyway. I wonder whether creating test
>> assemblies is worth the effort or whether I should simply proceed with
>> cutting a release candidate and call for a vote.
>> So what do you think, should I just cut an RC? Is there anything floating
>> around that should go into 2.0.6?
>> Stefan

View raw message