Thursday, February 09, 2012
 
The best way to analyze your logs! Minimize
 Log4Net Mail archive   

The Log4Net mailing list is a great source of information about using log4Net, in this forum we collect all the messages in the log4net user list and some selected threads from the developer list.

Subject: When will the next version be released?
Prev Next
You are not authorized to post a reply.

Author Messages
Yaojian

04/02/2009 4:33 PM  
Hi

anyone know that?


Peter Drier

04/02/2009 5:20 PM  

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

daniel.nitecki@o-i.com

04/02/2009 5:27 PM  

Has anyone made efforts to add the Mutex file locking scheme for file appenders into the source?  Someone
posted code for it  a while ago and I've been making use of it.  This could be worthy of a minor rev...

Yaojian

04/02/2009 5:35 PM  
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 :-(
steven higgan

04/03/2009 11:29 AM  

are you serious ??

i wold have thought the brokenness of the udp appender and the patch
that is available would have been enough to push out a new release.

sure i _can_ patch it myself but in my corporate environment and a
requirement to only use official releases for clients means that I
simply cant.

doing a quick diff between trunk @ head and the last release we can
see that a lot of files have been changed, doing a quick log we can
see that there are approximately three years worth of new features and
bug fixes, and to be honest if the churn is substantial enough the
shear volume of changes may mean real-world usage may turn up all
sorts of interesting stuff happening.

on the upside it compiles in VS2008 (dont have 2k5 installed), but at
least on my server 2k8 laptop with uac and visual studio running as a
normal user I get test failures (security exceptions) and two other
failures which look more intresting
(log4net.Tests.Util.LogLogTest.EmitInternalMessages() in
LogLogTest.cs: line 33  &
log4net.Tests.Util.LogLogTest.LogReceivedAdapter() in LogLogTest.cs:
line 54)

what will it take to get a release out the door ?

Peter Drier

04/04/2009 8:23 PM  
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
Walden H. Leverich

04/06/2009 4:15 PM  

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

 

Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.

(Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)

 

Neil Haughton

04/06/2009 4:27 PM  

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

 

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.
*********************************************************************************************************************************

 

Walden H. Leverich

04/06/2009 4:42 PM  

> Because if you don’t, surely you risk breaking existing applications when you upgrade log4net?

 

You might. But that's a decision and assessment that I can make when I choose to do the upgrade. I can (somewhat) see the point on two DLLs (or DLL and EXE) that are part of the same package. Say the GUI front-end .exe and the business logic implementation .dll. But for a utility like log4net strong naming just doesn't make sense to me.

 

-Walden

 

--

Walden H Leverich III

Tech Software

(516) 627-3800 x3051

WaldenL@TechSoftInc.com

http://www.TechSoftInc.com

 

Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.

(Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)

 

Simon Tamman

04/06/2009 4:48 PM  
Wouldn't they use the same private key across upgrades? I would assume they would. The strong naming afaik is to ensure that people can't create "unoffial" releases with the claim that they're official releases. I figured it was for legal and integrity reasons.
 
Simon
daniel.nitecki@o-i.com

04/06/2009 4:50 PM  

A strong name includes the version number as well as the key.
Strong naming is also required for installation in to the GAC, which I find useful for utilities such as
loggers.

2 cents,

Dan

Walden H. Leverich

04/06/2009 5:27 PM  

> A strong name includes the version number as well as the key.

And that's the problem. Any change that results in a new version # (even a trivial build # jump) means you need to fix the references. I actually find the GAC not very useful. Sure, core .NET files should be there, but I can drop the log4net DLL in my bin directory just as easily. The nice thing about the GAC is that you could drop an "upgrade" there and everything would get the advantage of the upgrade, however, because the version # is part of the strong name you'd have to visit everything anyway to tweak the .config files. Just simpler to drop log4net.dll where I need it.

Perhaps there should be two "official" releases, one signed one not. Then for companies that require "official AND signed" there's a solution, but for companies that simply require "official" there's also a solution. Of course that would require that 3rd party tools build w/out requiring a specific version to be of any use.

-Walden

--
Walden H Leverich III
Tech Software
(516) 627-3800 x3051
WaldenL@TechSoftInc.com
http://www.TechSoftInc.com

Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.
(Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)

Neil Haughton

04/06/2009 5:32 PM  

Sounds like a good compromise. Strong naming can be a real PIA if you don't actually want the "benefits" it brings.

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
 
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.
*********************************************************************************************************************************

Wayne Bradney

04/06/2009 5:48 PM  

You know you've been working too long when it takes a minute or so to realize that the intent of "PIA" was "pain in the ass" rather than "Primary Interop Assembly"...





Wayne M. Bradney
Chief Application Architect, Derivatives & Structured Products


Wall Street Systems, 1290 Avenue of the Americas, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10104
Phone:
+1 212 809 7200
Direct Dial:
+1 212 401 8239


Email:
wayne.bradney@wallstreetsystems.com
Web:
www.wallstreetsystems.com


Wall Street Systems – Empowering Treasury, Trading and Settlement

You are not authorized to post a reply.
Forums > Log4Net > Log4Net Mail archive > When will the next version be released?



ActiveForums 3.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Log4Net Dashboard

Log analysis and monitoring made easy!

Log4Net Dashboard is a log viewer that can read log statements from a variety of logging output targets.

You can download a free developer version.

  

Check it out!

On the demonstration site you can try it  with live data.demo.l4ndash.com - Try Log4Net Dashboard with live data

The mail archive is a copy of all the mail sent to the mail address: log4net-user@logging.apache.org, organized as a forum.

If you would like to participate in the mail list, send a mail to log4net-user-subscribe@logging.apache.org.

More information about the mailing list is available on: http://logging.apache.org/log4net/support.html

 

A complete topic list is available and can be viewed here (warning, it takes some time to load)

 

Copyright 2005-2008 by FaktNet AS Terms Of Use Privacy Statement