Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-logging-log4net-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4net-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 64D7A184B9 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:20:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 94011 invoked by uid 500); 18 Sep 2015 16:20:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4net-user-archive@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 93965 invoked by uid 500); 18 Sep 2015 16:20:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact log4net-user-help@logging.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: "Log4NET User" List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list log4net-user@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 93946 invoked by uid 99); 18 Sep 2015 16:20:50 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:20:50 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 9D6C51A24B0; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:20:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.879 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.879 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-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 (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yv1Ik01SaqgU; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:20:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com (mail-wi0-f173.google.com [209.85.212.173]) by mx1-eu-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-eu-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 4BB3621381; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:20:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicfx3 with SMTP id fx3so70966244wic.1; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:20:47 -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 :cc:content-type; bh=8F0tAHJEHXnBbF/fX1Zrpnzz6ge0f5AzMsiP2/6TCVo=; b=zcaUQ7CcqOOIz1wC1OpPU0Dx0iu9L2kVZbqDlqOCUcAODTcxE/rS+HDdALvTyqyu6k 2QM0fQiQbo0BMI/dey05jS9dhjIIhibQY+PlBJfAM4pe/9sNR5GilUpfXCuoYC3NwnB4 ptPkbH02oNZ3w0YFrqXaBMYdUGBrfOFqStL8UK20iq0NXXrWGXplLjboZL0aR7VTJHG3 VVOyDXnimP1ERlQJMisX/PAwTrGrqoafeGHNJVoQbW2taE7+3RwbVj9JHZXHU/7DSc4y aT973B0AiBoCz5kJTe3EbRjyjptHZ8sAVI6C+3paaepOQKqkJ9Fyy2eaDpCTrJuCuYrv LENQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.195.11.101 with SMTP id eh5mr8314530wjd.59.1442593246886; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.27.12.129 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.27.12.129 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:20:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <878u845gvn.fsf@v35516.1blu.de> Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 18:20:46 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: RE: Why is log4net not more similar to log4j(2)? From: Dominik Psenner To: Log4NET User Cc: Log4J Users List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b873d26094074052007ea5c --047d7b873d26094074052007ea5c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Given that both c# and java are very similar in both syntax and interpreter that runs the bytecode, users of log4j can expect a very steep learning curve when starting with log4net. Despite that log4net is based on log4j and thus may lack some things found in log4j2. These missing things and the support for ancient versions of the .net framework caused my desire to start off log4net2. So, yes, log4net2 should be based on log4j2 and reuse all the knowledge that has been generated within log4j2. It would be stupid to do otherwise. All this can be achieved only with a rewrite. Im no fan of code generators, therefore, translating java to c# will be no option to me. In the end we would probably have to invest more time in analyzing and bugfixing generated code. The downside of a rewrite is that it is a lot of work and thus it takes time. I can invest about an hour a week. Currently this hour goes into responding questions on both user and dev mailingist. To make this real a lot of helping hands will be required. Volunteers are welcome! Cheers On 18 Sep 2015 4:32 pm, "Nicholas Duane" wrote: > I looked over the thread you included below. I can't tell from that > whether the suggestion was to port log4j2. Not sure if the comment about > starting log4net 2.0 "from scratch" is an indication of having it be a port > of log4j2. > > In my mind the biggest benefit would be to have the same > architecture/feature set running on both linux and windows. Of course it > would also be great if the releases were synchronized. I know a big gripe > of log4net is that it's not getting rev'd. > > I would be interested in helping if the goal is to bring log4net in sync > with log4j2. And by this I guess I mean port as that would seem the > easiest and safest path to the goal. > > I haven't worked on any open source project in the past. I'm curious, how > does this work? Who's coordinating and making the decisions? > > Thanks, > Nick > > > From: bodewig@apache.org > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org; log4net-user@logging.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Why is log4net not more similar to log4j(2)? > > Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:25:00 +0200 > > > > On 2015-09-17, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > > > "Patches welcome" is my motto :-) > > > > > Gary > > > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Nicholas Duane > wrote: > > > > >> Sending to both the log4j and log4net mailing lists. > > > > >> I'm curious why log4net is not more similar to log4j(2)? Is it because > > >> there is less development work being done on log4net and log4j had > > >> significant changes in the 2.0 version? > > > > > I think I read somewhere that log4net was a port of log4j 1. > > > > This is certainly part of the reason. log4net was started as a port of > > 1.x a long time ago. The developers (long before I joined) added some > > deviations that look closer to what log4j 2 is doing (XML > > configuration). > > > > Incidently Dominik started a discussion about log4net 2.0 on the dev > > list[1] and some people expressed interest. Any hand that can offer > > some help is more than welcome, so please come over and join. > > > > [1] thread starting with > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/logging-log4net-dev/201508.mbox/%3C03be01d0da4f%24a85aaa10%24f90ffe30%24%40apache.org%3E > > > > Stefan > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@logging.apache.org > > > --047d7b873d26094074052007ea5c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Given that both c# and java are very similar in both syntax = and interpreter that runs the bytecode, users of log4j can expect a very st= eep learning curve when starting with log4net. Despite that log4net is base= d on log4j and thus may lack some things found in log4j2. These missing thi= ngs and the support for ancient versions of the .net framework caused my de= sire to start off log4net2.

So, yes, log4net2 should be based on log4j2 and reuse all th= e knowledge that has been generated within log4j2. It would be stupid to do= otherwise.

All this can be achieved only with a rewrite. Im no fan of c= ode generators, therefore, translating java to c# will be no option to me. = In the end we would probably have to invest more time in analyzing and bugf= ixing generated code.

The downside of a rewrite is that it is a lot of work and th= us it takes time. I can invest about an hour a week. Currently this hour go= es into responding questions on both user and dev mailingist. To make this = real a lot of helping hands will be required. Volunteers are welcome!

Cheers

On 18 Sep 2015 4:32 pm, "Nicholas Duane&quo= t; <nickdu@msn.com> wrote:
I looked over the thread you included below.=C2=A0 I = can't tell from that whether the suggestion was to port log4j2.=C2=A0 N= ot sure if the comment about starting log4net 2.0 "from scratch" = is an indication of having it be a port of log4j2.

In my mind the bi= ggest benefit would be to have the same architecture/feature set running on= both linux and windows.=C2=A0 Of course it would also be great if the rele= ases were synchronized.=C2=A0 I know a big gripe of log4net is that it'= s not getting rev'd.

I would be interested in helping if the goa= l is to bring log4net in sync with log4j2.=C2=A0 And by this I guess I mean= port as that would seem the easiest and safest path to the goal.

I = haven't worked on any open source project in the past.=C2=A0 I'm cu= rious, how does this work?=C2=A0 Who's coordinating and making the deci= sions?

Thanks,
Nick

> From: bodewig@apache.org
> To: log4j-user@log= ging.apache.org; log4net-user@logging.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Why= is log4net not more similar to log4j(2)?
> Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09= :25:00 +0200
>
> On 2015-09-17, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > "Patches welcome" is my motto :-)
>
> &g= t; Gary
>
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Nicholas Dua= ne <nickdu@msn.com> wrote:
>
> >> Sending to both the log4j and log4n= et mailing lists.
>
> >> I'm curious why log4net is = not more similar to log4j(2)? Is it because
> >> there is less= development work being done on log4net and log4j had
> >> sign= ificant changes in the 2.0 version?
>
> > I think I read so= mewhere that log4net was a port of log4j 1.
>
> This is certai= nly part of the reason. log4net was started as a port of
> 1.x a lon= g time ago. The developers (long before I joined) added some
> devia= tions that look closer to what log4j 2 is doing (XML
> configuration)= .
>
> Incidently Dominik started a discussion about log4net 2.= 0 on the dev
> list[1] and some people expressed interest. Any hand = that can offer
> some help is more than welcome, so please come over = and join.
>
> [1] thread starting with http://mail-a= rchives.apache.org/mod_mbox/logging-log4net-dev/201508.mbox/%3C03be01d0da4f= %24a85aaa10%24f90ffe30%24%40apache.org%3E
>
> Stefan
&g= t;
> ---------------------------------------------------------------= ------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@logging.a= pache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@logging= .apache.org
>
--047d7b873d26094074052007ea5c--