Fwd: WARN: invalid asfext:pmc 'https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/' in https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf

2018-04-10 Thread sebb
As the subject says: the asfext:pmc value is incorrect; it must point
to a PMC not a release.


-- Forwarded message --
From: Projects 
Date: 10 April 2018 at 03:00
Subject: WARN: invalid asfext:pmc
'https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/' in
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf
To: Site Development 


Fwd: WARN: invalid asfext:pmc 'https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/' in https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf

2018-04-12 Thread sebb
Please fix this.


-- Forwarded message --
From: Projects 
Date: 12 April 2018 at 03:00
Subject: WARN: invalid asfext:pmc
'https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/' in
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf
To: Site Development 


WARN: invalid asfext:pmc 'https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/' in
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf


Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Log4j-Audit 1.0.1 released

2018-12-13 Thread sebb
On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 18:55, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>
> The Apache Log4j Audit team is pleased to announce the Log4j Audit 1.0.1 
> release!
>
> Apache Log4j Audit is a framework for performing audit logging using a 
> predefined catalog of audit events. It provides a tool to create and edit 
> audit events. It also provides a REST service to perform the logging so that 
> non-Java applications can use a common auditing facility.
>
> Release 1.0.1
>
> Changes in this version include:
>
> Fixed Bugs
>
> • LOG4J2-2428: Use the AuditExceptionHandler for validation exceptions. 
> Thanks to Andrei Ivanov.
> • LOG4J2-2443: Fix inconsistencies in validation exceptions. Thanks to Andrei 
> Ivanov.
> • LOG4J2-2440: AuditEvents should provide some basic toString(). Thanks to 
> Andrei Ivanov.
> • LOG4J2-2429: Setting the exceptionHandler on the AuditEvent sets it as a 
> ThreadContext variable. Thanks to Andrei Ivanov.
> • LOG4J2-2421: Add verbose parameter to the Log4j audit Maven plugin. Thanks 
> to Andrei Ivanov.
> • LOG4J2-2421: AbstractEventLogger.logEvent doesn't check for missing 
> required context attributes. Thanks to Andrei Ivanov.
> • LOG4J2-2417: Better handling of optional properties. Thanks to Andrei 
> Ivanov.
> • LOG4J2-2420: RequestContextFilter logging cleanup. Thanks to Andrei Ivanov.
> • LOG4J2-2442: Normalize the event names logged through 
> AbstractEventLogger.logEvent. Thanks to Andrei Ivanov.
> • LOG4J2-2431: Narrow the return type of getEvent. Thanks to Andrei Ivanov.
>
> Apache Log4j Audit 1.0.1 requires a minimum of Java 8 to build and run.
>
> The download links for the source and binary artifacts can be found at 
> http://logging.apache.org/log4j-audit/latest/download.html.
>
> For complete information on Apache Log4j Audit, including instructions on how 
> to submit bug reports, patches, or suggestions for improvement, see the 
> Apache Apache Log4j Audit website:
>
> http://logging.apache.org/log4j-audit/latest/

The above link does not work in the email that you sent.

This is because the original email was sent as both text and HTML, and
the HTML copy was different from the text copy. The link seen by the
end user may depend on their mail client.

Please stick to plain text mails for the announce e-mails in future.




>


Fwd: Cannot find doap file: https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf

2021-12-15 Thread sebb
FYI
-- Forwarded message -
From: Projects 
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 02:00
Subject: Cannot find doap file:
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf
To: Site Development 


URL: https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf
HTTP Error 404: Not Found
Source: 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/projects.apache.org/trunk/data/projects.xml


URGENT: download page has wrong links for 2.3

2021-12-15 Thread sebb
The links for the previous release (2.3) actually point to 2.12.1

They should ideally use sha256 or sha512 and not md5

Sebb


Re: URGENT: download page has wrong links for 2.3

2021-12-15 Thread sebb
Also the section for 2.12.1 should now be removed; presumably no-one
should be using it going forward?

On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 12:30, sebb  wrote:
>
> The links for the previous release (2.3) actually point to 2.12.1
>
> They should ideally use sha256 or sha512 and not md5
>
> Sebb


Re: Dropping old folders from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/logging/log4j/

2021-12-15 Thread sebb
On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 14:17, Gary Gregory  wrote:
>
> It seems to me we should drop:
> - 2.12.1

BTW, this is referenced from:

https://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.12.2/download.html
which redirects to
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.12.1/download.html

That page anyway needs an urgent update as the 2.3 links lead to a
different version

> - 2.15.0
>
> ?

Please fix the 2.12.[12] download page!

>
> Gary


Re: URGENT: download page has wrong links for 2.3

2021-12-15 Thread sebb
On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 16:39, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>
> We build a new instance of our web site for every log4j release. They are all 
> there at https://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.xx/index.html where xx is 
> the rest of the release number.
>
> It takes about an hour to build the web site using the maven site plugin. 
> Since nothing was really changing we decided to reuse the 2.12.1 release site 
> and update it with 2.12.2.

I realise that rebuilding everything is a pain, but it looks bad to
have broken links on a download page that has been sent to the general
announce list.

Especially when it relates to a security fix.

However it should not be necessary to rebuild everything just to fix a
single page; it can be updated directly in the relevant site repo
which should take a few minutes.

> When we can breath I believe we will go generate the 2.12.2 site and change 
> 2.12.1 back to its original state.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> > On Dec 15, 2021, at 6:20 AM, sebb  wrote:
> >
> > Also the section for 2.12.1 should now be removed; presumably no-one
> > should be using it going forward?
> >
> > On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 12:30, sebb  wrote:
> >>
> >> The links for the previous release (2.3) actually point to 2.12.1
> >>
> >> They should ideally use sha256 or sha512 and not md5
> >>
> >> Sebb
> >
>


Re: Cannot find doap file: https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf

2021-12-15 Thread sebb
OK, in the meantime please update projects.xml to remove the link

On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 16:09, Matt Sicker  wrote:
>
> There’s a bug in the doap plugin on certain architectures. We’ll have to look 
> into this to re-enable the plugin.
>
> —
> Matt Sicker
>
> > On Dec 15, 2021, at 04:35, sebb  wrote:
> >
> > FYI
> > -- Forwarded message -
> > From: Projects 
> > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 02:00
> > Subject: Cannot find doap file:
> > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf
> > To: Site Development 
> >
> >
> > URL: https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf
> > HTTP Error 404: Not Found
> > Source: 
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/projects.apache.org/trunk/data/projects.xml


Multiple KEYS files

2021-12-19 Thread sebb
The logging project currently has 3 KEYS files under
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/logging

KEYS
log4net/KEYS
log4php/KEYS

Ideally these should be combined at the top level and redirects added.

Sebb


Re: Multiple KEYS files

2021-12-19 Thread sebb
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 at 21:53, Matt Sicker  wrote:
>
> Yes, I’ve migrated at least one relevant key for log4net into the root keys 
> file. As log4php is dormant, that other keys file may no longer be necessary. 
> I’ll clean up the remaining bits and symlink the canonical keys file instead.

KEYS files are still needed for dormant (and archived) components.

Entries in KEYS files should not be dropped once they have been used
to sign a release.

Sebb.
[I suppose if a key is revoked, it might make sense to drop the entry,
but I would check this with Infra first]

> --
> Matt Sicker
>
> > On Dec 19, 2021, at 15:46, sebb  wrote:
> >
> > The logging project currently has 3 KEYS files under
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/logging
> >
> > KEYS
> > log4net/KEYS
> > log4php/KEYS
> >
> > Ideally these should be combined at the top level and redirects added.
> >
> > Sebb
>


Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Move apache/log4j1 Git repo to apache/logging-log4j1 Git repo

2021-12-24 Thread sebb
On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 at 17:03, Carter Kozak  wrote:
>
> You can find the PMC list here: 
> https://people.apache.org/phonebook.html?pmc=logging

AFAIK that uses the LDAP group.

The official list is derived from committee-info.txt as shown by Whimsy:
https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committee/logging

This should normally be the same, but there are sometimes differences
(usually accidental, but sometimes deliberate).

> On Fri, Dec 24, 2021, at 11:59, Vladimir Sitnikov wrote:
> > AFAIK only PMC members have binding votes.
> >
> > AFAIK Carter Kozak, Robert Middleton, and Volkan Yazici are not PMC members
> > of Logging as per
> > https://people.apache.org/phonebook.html?project=logging
> >
> > So the updated summary is
> >
> > Binding +1 votes were received from Ralph Goers, Dominik Psenner, Matt
> > Sicker, Ron Grabowski, and Remko Popma
> > Binding -1 votes were received from Gary Gregory and Christian Grobmeier
> > A non-binding +1 vote was received from Carter Kozak, Robert Middleton,
> > Volkan Yazici, Vladimir Sitnikov
> >
> > Vladimir
> >


Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Move apache/log4j1 Git repo to apache/logging-log4j1 Git repo

2021-12-24 Thread sebb
On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 at 17:57, Vladimir Sitnikov
 wrote:
>
> 1) I stand corrected, I misinterpreted the phonebook (I watched on bold
> records only), so your calculation was correct. Sorry for that.

Entries in bold are ASF members.

> > which was only started 19 hours ago
>
> "vote count != consensus", and the key we seek is consensus (e.g.
> agreement).
> For instance, if the tally is like +5 -2, then, it is up to somebody (vote
> starter?)
> to decide if there's an agreement indeed.
>
> >VOTE threads at JMeter
>
> (un)fortunately, there are only a few active committers/PMCs, so we just
> vote fast, and we know no new votes would appear.
>
> >voting [1] applies to the VOTE thread?
>
> I guess it is up to the one who starts the thread.
> If you mention "lazy consensus", it becomes lazy.
> If you mention "votes are open for 365 days", then it becomes 365 day vote
> :)
>
> Vladimir


Please update Flume DOAP

2024-03-07 Thread sebb
https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/blob/trunk/doap_Flume.rdf
still shows the PMC as Flume; please update to show PMC Logging.

Thanks,
Sebb


Re: Please update Flume DOAP

2024-03-14 Thread sebb
Ping?

On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 at 11:42, sebb  wrote:
>
> https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/blob/trunk/doap_Flume.rdf
> still shows the PMC as Flume; please update to show PMC Logging.
>
> Thanks,
> Sebb


Re: Please update Flume DOAP

2024-03-14 Thread sebb
Note: this is the line that needs to be fixed:

https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/blob/trunk/doap_Flume.rdf#L29

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 08:57, sebb  wrote:
>
> Ping?
>
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 at 11:42, sebb  wrote:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/blob/trunk/doap_Flume.rdf
> > still shows the PMC as Flume; please update to show PMC Logging.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Sebb


Re: Please update Flume DOAP

2024-03-19 Thread sebb
PING - still needs to be fixed.

On Fri, 15 Mar 2024 at 00:42, sebb  wrote:
>
> Note: this is the line that needs to be fixed:
>
> https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/blob/trunk/doap_Flume.rdf#L29
>
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 08:57, sebb  wrote:
> >
> > Ping?
> >
> > On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 at 11:42, sebb  wrote:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/blob/trunk/doap_Flume.rdf
> > > still shows the PMC as Flume; please update to show PMC Logging.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Sebb


Re: Please update Flume DOAP

2024-03-19 Thread sebb
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 at 20:40, Jan Friedrich  wrote:
>
> Hi Sebb,
>
> is this what you want?
>
> https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/pull/421

That is what needs to be done so that projects.a.o works properly for Flume.

[It is not something that I personally want]

> Regards.
>
> Jan
>
> Tuesday, March 19, 2024, 6:44:10 PM, you wrote:
>
> > PING - still needs to be fixed.
>
> > On Fri, 15 Mar 2024 at 00:42, sebb  wrote:
> >>
> >> Note: this is the line that needs to be fixed:
> >>
> >> https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/blob/trunk/doap_Flume.rdf#L29
> >>
> >> On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 08:57, sebb  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Ping?
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 at 11:42, sebb  wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/blob/trunk/doap_Flume.rdf
> >> > > still shows the PMC as Flume; please update to show PMC Logging.
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > > Sebb
>