logging-log4net-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Neil Haughton" <Neil.Haugh...@autoscribe.co.uk>
Subject RE: When will the next version be released?
Date Mon, 06 Apr 2009 14:27:21 GMT
Because if you don't, surely you risk breaking existing applications
when you upgrade log4net? 

 

Regards,

 

Neil Haughton BSc MIET IEng(CEI)
Development Manager

 

Autoscribe Limited
Wellington House
Riseley Business Park
Basingstoke Road, Riseley
Berkshire RG7 1NW

 

Office: +44 (0) 118 984 0610
Fax:   +44 (0) 118 984 0611

 

Visit our website at: www.autoscribe.co.uk
<http://www.autoscribe.co.uk/> 

 

Registered in Wales No: 1539748

 

**********************************************************DISCLAIMER****
*************************************************

 

The contents of this email are confidential and are intended solely for
the use of the individual or company to
whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error then
please accept our apology. If this is the case
we would be obliged if you would contact the sender and then delete this
email. Opinions expressed in this email
are those of the individual and do not necessarily represent the
opinions of Autoscribe Ltd. Although this email
and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus no
responsibility is accepted by Autoscribe Ltd for any
loss or damage arising in any way from the receipt or use of this email
or attachments.
************************************************************************
*********************************************************

 

From: Walden H. Leverich [mailto:WaldenL@TechSoftInc.com] 
Sent: 06 April 2009 15:16
To: Log4NET User
Subject: RE: When will the next version be released?

 

I forget, is the "official" release strongly named? And if so, did those
other components reference it by strong name? I tend to hate strong
naming! It's a logging component, if there's an upgrade I should be able
to use it, why should I be tied to an older version just because you
built against the older version?

 

-Walden

 

-- 

Walden H Leverich III

Tech Software

(516) 627-3800 x3051

WaldenL@TechSoftInc.com

http://www.TechSoftInc.com <http://www.techsoftinc.com/> 

 

Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.

(Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)

 

From: Peter Drier [mailto:peter.drier@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2009 2:24 PM
To: Log4NET User
Subject: Re: When will the next version be released?

 

So the last time log4net upgraded from .9 to .10, that process was
actually somewhat painful for me..  as you note a lot of components rely
on log4net .10..  And dealing with different versions of log4net
simultaneously wasn't fun (we weren't allowed to gac it for various
reasons, nor do you want 2 copies of log4net loaded into a single
process anyways).  

Now, given that most to all of the updates/bug fixes are in the
appenders, it may make sense to split log4net into 2 packages..  one
that's the core log4net bits + appender skeleton + interfaces..  and one
that's the bundled appenders..  

That way, the third party packages (nunit, nhibernate, ...) can depend
on the core log4net bits without having to upgrade every time Nicko does
a appender bug fix..  

This may even be enough to warrant a 1.3 ?

Nicko?

-Peter

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Yaojian <skyaoj@gmail.com> wrote:

I am totally agree with the reliable of log4net.

I just want a bug-fix version, espically the UdpAppender issue
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4NET-112

As lots of third-party components (for example, NHibernate) rely on
log4net's public GA 1.2.10, I have to rebuild all these third-party
components with my private build from the log4net svn :-(

 

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:20 PM, Peter Drier <peter.drier@gmail.com>
wrote:

Maybe when someone comes up with a legit feature need that it doesn't
already cover?

Seriously though, I've been using 1.2.10 for years now and log4net has
been the most reliable 3rd party package I've used across many
applications. The only things I've needed that it couldn't do fit easily
in the appender and plugin frameworks.

Don't fix what isn't broken!

Peter

On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:33 AM, Yaojian <skyaoj@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi

anyone know that?

 

 


Mime
View raw message