[poll] Memory Mapped Appender in 2.1 vs 2.2?

Discussion:

Gary Gregory

2014-09-18 11:47:54 UTC

Any thoughts on merging the MMA for 2.1 vs. 2.2?

Gary

--
E-Mail: ***@gmail.com | ***@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Remko Popma

2014-09-18 12:07:33 UTC

Permalink

The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the LOG4J2-431
branch into master.
Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it different from,
say, GELFLayout?

Post by Gary Gregory
Any thoughts on merging the MMA for 2.1 vs. 2.2?
Gary
--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Gary Gregory

2014-09-18 13:10:53 UTC

Permalink

It's just a poll, we have to draw the line somewhere and polish and address
Jiras for 2.1. I know we operate in what feels sometimes like a
free-for-all but it seems appropriate to slow things down a bit before we
think of releasing. We also operate in a "do-ocracy" so I do not think any
one will stop you from merging if that what you think is best.

Gary

Post by Remko Popma
The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the LOG4J2-431
branch into master.
Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it different
from, say, GELFLayout?

Remko Popma

2014-09-18 16:22:17 UTC

Permalink

Well, sure, after documenting this appender and testing it on 4 OS'es and 8
JVMs I think it is ready to be merged and included in 2.1.
It doesn't get much more polished than that... :-)

I don't see any reason not to include it so I'll go ahead and merge
LOG4J2-431 into master.

About polishing and addressing Jiras slated for 2.1, is there anything in
particular you want me to help with?

Regards, -Remko

Post by Gary Gregory
It's just a poll, we have to draw the line somewhere and polish and
address Jiras for 2.1. I know we operate in what feels sometimes like a
free-for-all but it seems appropriate to slow things down a bit before we
think of releasing. We also operate in a "do-ocracy" so I do not think any
one will stop you from merging if that what you think is best.
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the
LOG4J2-431 branch into master.
Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it different
from, say, GELFLayout?

--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Gary Gregory

2014-09-18 16:41:49 UTC

Permalink

Next I'd like to see something to help log hex dumps. I emailed about this
in the last couple of weeks.

I would also like the start of my logs to start with the same information
"java -version" provides.Separate message coming.

Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Well, sure, after documenting this appender and testing it on 4 OS'es and
8 JVMs I think it is ready to be merged and included in 2.1.
It doesn't get much more polished than that... :-)
I don't see any reason not to include it so I'll go ahead and merge
LOG4J2-431 into master.
About polishing and addressing Jiras slated for 2.1, is there anything in
particular you want me to help with?
Regards, -Remko

Post by Remko Popma
The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the
LOG4J2-431 branch into master.
Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it different
from, say, GELFLayout?

Remko Popma

2014-09-18 17:10:34 UTC

Permalink

All interesting stuff!
Are we targeting this for 2.1?

Post by Gary Gregory
Next I'd like to see something to help log hex dumps. I emailed about this
in the last couple of weeks.
I would also like the start of my logs to start with the same information
"java -version" provides.Separate message coming.
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the
LOG4J2-431 branch into master.
Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it different
from, say, GELFLayout?

Gary Gregory

2014-09-18 17:22:45 UTC

Permalink

I'd rather RERO and keep moving. But the timiing depends on Matt's
availability to RM a beta and/or release candidate.

I think the path we agreed on is to cut a beta ASAP to put the new features
(JUL, IO streams, and now MMFA) in the wild.

I'd like to think we are fixing bug or addressing reports as they come up
but I what it feels like from reading the ML and Jira is that people are
trickling in reports and comments. So I want to make sure we fix what needs
to be fixed ASAP, or document, or create FAQ entries...

For example, what should we do about:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-829
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-818

Gary

Post by Remko Popma
All interesting stuff!
Are we targeting this for 2.1?

Post by Gary Gregory
Next I'd like to see something to help log hex dumps. I emailed about
this in the last couple of weeks.
I would also like the start of my logs to start with the same information
"java -version" provides.Separate message coming.
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Well, sure, after documenting this appender and testing it on 4 OS'es
and 8 JVMs I think it is ready to be merged and included in 2.1.
It doesn't get much more polished than that... :-)
I don't see any reason not to include it so I'll go ahead and merge
LOG4J2-431 into master.
About polishing and addressing Jiras slated for 2.1, is there anything
in particular you want me to help with?
Regards, -Remko

Post by Remko Popma
The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the
LOG4J2-431 branch into master.
Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it different
from, say, GELFLayout?

Remko Popma

2014-09-18 17:45:24 UTC

Permalink

Note that JUL and IO Streams are not 100% done:
The JUL component page needs to be updated,
and the IO Streams component does not have a page yet. IOStreams also does
not have a changelog entry yet.
(Is LOG4J2-547 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-547> the
correct Jira for IO Streams? Gary or Matt, can you add a changelog entry?)

If we are going to do a beta, we need to ensure that users can download
both the 2.0.2 jars and the 2.1-beta jars from the site.
I have no idea how much work it would be to change the site...

LOG4J2-829 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-829> on the face
of it looks fairly straightforward. If you guys work on the above I can
take care of this one.
LOG4J2-818 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-818> may be
non-trivial and perhaps not feasible for 2.1-beta.

Post by Gary Gregory
I'd rather RERO and keep moving. But the timiing depends on Matt's
availability to RM a beta and/or release candidate.
I think the path we agreed on is to cut a beta ASAP to put the new
features (JUL, IO streams, and now MMFA) in the wild.
I'd like to think we are fixing bug or addressing reports as they come up
but I what it feels like from reading the ML and Jira is that people are
trickling in reports and comments. So I want to make sure we fix what needs
to be fixed ASAP, or document, or create FAQ entries...
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-829
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-818
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
All interesting stuff!
Are we targeting this for 2.1?

Post by Gary Gregory
Next I'd like to see something to help log hex dumps. I emailed about
this in the last couple of weeks.
I would also like the start of my logs to start with the same
information "java -version" provides.Separate message coming.
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Well, sure, after documenting this appender and testing it on 4 OS'es
and 8 JVMs I think it is ready to be merged and included in 2.1.
It doesn't get much more polished than that... :-)
I don't see any reason not to include it so I'll go ahead and merge
LOG4J2-431 into master.
About polishing and addressing Jiras slated for 2.1, is there anything
in particular you want me to help with?
Regards, -Remko

Post by Remko Popma
The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the
LOG4J2-431 branch into master.
Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it different
from, say, GELFLayout?

Matt Sicker

2014-09-18 22:47:55 UTC

Permalink

Updated the JUL component page docs, and added component docs for IOStreams.

Post by Remko Popma
The JUL component page needs to be updated,
and the IO Streams component does not have a page yet. IOStreams also does
not have a changelog entry yet.
(Is LOG4J2-547 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-547> the
correct Jira for IO Streams? Gary or Matt, can you add a changelog entry?)
If we are going to do a beta, we need to ensure that users can download
both the 2.0.2 jars and the 2.1-beta jars from the site.
I have no idea how much work it would be to change the site...
LOG4J2-829 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-829> on the face
of it looks fairly straightforward. If you guys work on the above I can
take care of this one.
LOG4J2-818 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-818> may be
non-trivial and perhaps not feasible for 2.1-beta.

Post by Remko Popma
All interesting stuff!
Are we targeting this for 2.1?

Post by Gary Gregory
Next I'd like to see something to help log hex dumps. I emailed about
this in the last couple of weeks.
I would also like the start of my logs to start with the same
information "java -version" provides.Separate message coming.
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Well, sure, after documenting this appender and testing it on 4 OS'es
and 8 JVMs I think it is ready to be merged and included in 2.1.
It doesn't get much more polished than that... :-)
I don't see any reason not to include it so I'll go ahead and merge
LOG4J2-431 into master.
About polishing and addressing Jiras slated for 2.1, is there anything
in particular you want me to help with?
Regards, -Remko

Post by Remko Popma
The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the
LOG4J2-431 branch into master.
Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it
different from, say, GELFLayout?
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Gary Gregory <

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Remko Popma

2014-09-18 23:48:56 UTC

Permalink

You the man! Very nice!

Sent from my iPhone

Post by Matt Sicker
Updated the JUL component page docs, and added component docs for IOStreams.

Post by Remko Popma
The JUL component page needs to be updated,
and the IO Streams component does not have a page yet. IOStreams also does not have a changelog entry yet.
(Is LOG4J2-547 the correct Jira for IO Streams? Gary or Matt, can you add a changelog entry?)
If we are going to do a beta, we need to ensure that users can download both the 2.0.2 jars and the 2.1-beta jars from the site.
I have no idea how much work it would be to change the site...
LOG4J2-829 on the face of it looks fairly straightforward. If you guys work on the above I can take care of this one.
LOG4J2-818 may be non-trivial and perhaps not feasible for 2.1-beta.

I'd rather RERO and keep moving. But the timiing depends on Matt's availability to RM a beta and/or release candidate.
I think the path we agreed on is to cut a beta ASAP to put the new features (JUL, IO streams, and now MMFA) in the wild.
I'd like to think we are fixing bug or addressing reports as they come up but I what it feels like from reading the ML and Jira is that people are trickling in reports and comments. So I want to make sure we fix what needs to be fixed ASAP, or document, or create FAQ entries...
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-829
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-818
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
All interesting stuff!
Are we targeting this for 2.1?

Next I'd like to see something to help log hex dumps. I emailed about this in the last couple of weeks.
I would also like the start of my logs to start with the same information "java -version" provides.Separate message coming.
Gary

Well, sure, after documenting this appender and testing it on 4 OS'es and 8 JVMs I think it is ready to be merged and included in 2.1.
It doesn't get much more polished than that... :-)
I don't see any reason not to include it so I'll go ahead and merge LOG4J2-431 into master.
About polishing and addressing Jiras slated for 2.1, is there anything in particular you want me to help with?
Regards, -Remko

It's just a poll, we have to draw the line somewhere and polish and address Jiras for 2.1. I know we operate in what feels sometimes like a free-for-all but it seems appropriate to slow things down a bit before we think of releasing. We also operate in a "do-ocracy" so I do not think any one will stop you from merging if that what you think is best.
Gary

The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the LOG4J2-431 branch into master.
Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it different from, say, GELFLayout?

Post by Gary Gregory
Any thoughts on merging the MMA for 2.1 vs. 2.2?
Gary
--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition
Spring Batch in Action
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition
Spring Batch in Action
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory