Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc2

I've committed the updated .asc files in revision 24339. MD5 and SHA-512 hashes are still the same. Do note that you can also verify the git tag using the same gpg key via this command: git tag --verify chainsaw-2.0.0-rc2 On 20 January 2018 at 16:47, Matt Sicker wrote: > I didn't change my key

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc2

I didn't change my key (last 8 characters are the same as the short id). Looks like I might have signed it wrong. On 20 January 2018 at 15:01, ralph.goers dslextreme.com < ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > Did you use a new signing key? When I try to verify I get > > gpg --verify apache-chains

Re: [log4net] exclusive lock on .NET Core 1.x and Linux

On 2018-01-20, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > it looks as if exclusive locking didn't work properly for > RollingfileAppender on Linux for our NET Core tests. This has also > been true for the MONO_2_0 builds ages ago. I haven't checked whether > we are hitting a known limitation so far. https://github.

[log4net] exclusive lock on .NET Core 1.x and Linux

Hi all it looks as if exclusive locking didn't work properly for RollingfileAppender on Linux for our NET Core tests. This has also been true for the MONO_2_0 builds ages ago. I haven't checked whether we are hitting a known limitation so far. I have disabled the test conditionallly on Linux and

Re: [log4net] release 2.0.9

On 20 Jan 2018 9:29 p.m., "Stefan Bodewig" wrote: On 2018-01-20, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 20 Jan 2018 7:27 p.m., "Stefan Bodewig" wrote: >> Building .NET 2.0 (not standard or core, good old .NET framework) was >> broken. > I see. I wonder why the build worked on ci. because there is no bu

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc2

Did you use a new signing key? When I try to verify I get gpg --verify apache-chainsaw-2.0.0-bin.tar.gz.asc apache-chainsaw-2.0.0-bin.tar.gz gpg: Signature made Fri Nov 10 11:41:12 2017 MST gpg:using RSA key 9D0A56AAA0D60E0C0C7DCCC0B4C70893B62BABE8 gpg: BAD signature from "Matthew

Re: Planning out what we can do to get Chainsaw back in the game

Still pretty certain you would attract a lot more talent / downloads / interest in general with Visual Studio Code (Typescript) and Stackblitz: https://stackblitz.com/ It's essentially Kotlin but a lot more feature rich. Ole On 01/20/2018 12:00 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: I've put out rc2 now tha

Re: [log4net] release 2.0.9

On 2018-01-20, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 20 Jan 2018 7:27 p.m., "Stefan Bodewig" wrote: >> Building .NET 2.0 (not standard or core, good old .NET framework) was >> broken. > I see. I wonder why the build worked on ci. because there is no build step for compile-net-2.0 :-) I'll try to add on

Re: [log4net] release 2.0.9

On 20 Jan 2018 7:27 p.m., "Stefan Bodewig" wrote: On 2018-01-20, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 20 Jan 2018 6:47 p.m., "Stefan Bodewig" wrote: >> On 2018-01-15, Dominik Psenner wrote: > >>> 2018-01-15 10:22 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig : There still are lots of version conflicts that we probabl

Re: [log4net] release 2.0.9

On 2018-01-20, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 20 Jan 2018 6:47 p.m., "Stefan Bodewig" wrote: >> On 2018-01-15, Dominik Psenner wrote: > >>> 2018-01-15 10:22 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig : There still are lots of version conflicts that we probably want to reolve first. Unfortunately I have no

Re: [log4net] release 2.0.9

On 20 Jan 2018 6:47 p.m., "Stefan Bodewig" wrote: On 2018-01-15, Dominik Psenner wrote: > 2018-01-15 10:22 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig : >> Hi >> by now I've dusted off the old VM that I used to build 2.0.8 (at leat >> the Windows part of it), installed .NET Core SDK 1.1.7 in order to be >> able

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc2

+1 Pulled the git tag, built it and started Chainsaw from the standalone tarball and zips. Wandered through the website - there is cleanup to be done, but that's work that can be done post-release. Scott On 1/20/18, Matt Sicker wrote: > This is a vote to release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc2 > > S

Re: Planning out what we can do to get Chainsaw back in the game

I've put out rc2 now that we have some fixes in place there. My professional situation has changed since I proposed this. Nowadays, I've been using Kotlin for a project, and I'd have to say that it would be far more appropriate than Scala here due to being easier to learn as a Java developer (or j

Re: [log4cxx] Current State

I'd be available to help with the release process along with any karma mangling needed. On 20 January 2018 at 06:36, Thorsten Schöning wrote: > Guten Tag Robert Middleton, > am Samstag, 20. Januar 2018 um 04:00 schrieben Sie: > > > As prompted by the discussion last week about the state of log4c

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc1

This vote is cancelled and is superseded by the vote for 2.0.0-rc2. On 20 January 2018 at 11:40, Scott Deboy wrote: > Sure > > On Jan 20, 2018 9:04 AM, "Matt Sicker" wrote: > > > Wouldn't it be 2.0.0-rc2? Also, good timing: I can cut a new RC in the > next > > few hours. > > > > On 20 January 2

Re: [log4net] release 2.0.9

On 2018-01-15, Dominik Psenner wrote: > 2018-01-15 10:22 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig : >> Hi >> by now I've dusted off the old VM that I used to build 2.0.8 (at leat >> the Windows part of it), installed .NET Core SDK 1.1.7 in order to be >> able to deal with the csproj files (2.0.8 has been using

[VOTE] Release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc2

This is a vote to release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc2 Source and binary artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/logging/chainsaw/ Committed under SVN revision 24337. Site: http://musigma.org/chainsaw-site/ https://github.com/jvz/chainsaw-site Git: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc1

Sure On Jan 20, 2018 9:04 AM, "Matt Sicker" wrote: > Wouldn't it be 2.0.0-rc2? Also, good timing: I can cut a new RC in the next > few hours. > > On 20 January 2018 at 09:47, Scott Deboy wrote: > > > Matt, would you mind re-spinning a new build at 2.1.0-rc1? > > > > On 1/19/18, Scott Deboy wro

Re: logging-log4j2 git commit: [LOG4J2-2186] Add a JDBC ConnectionSource that provides pooling through Apache Commons DBCP 2.

I am fine with doing that but we would still want a way to get to all the plugin sites from the log4j web site. Maven does that and maintains a list at https://maven.apache.org/plugins/ . I think the easiest way to manage a page like that would to have it be a

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc1

Wouldn't it be 2.0.0-rc2? Also, good timing: I can cut a new RC in the next few hours. On 20 January 2018 at 09:47, Scott Deboy wrote: > Matt, would you mind re-spinning a new build at 2.1.0-rc1? > > On 1/19/18, Scott Deboy wrote: > > I finally looked at this. I pushed a change to app assemble

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Chainsaw 2.0.0-rc1

Matt, would you mind re-spinning a new build at 2.1.0-rc1? On 1/19/18, Scott Deboy wrote: > I finally looked at this. I pushed a change to app assembler config > to make the bin directory executable, and updated HOWTOBUILD to > mention you need to run mvn site:site first. > > Can we resin? > > O

Re: logging-log4j2 git commit: [LOG4J2-2186] Add a JDBC ConnectionSource that provides pooling through Apache Commons DBCP 2.

As I wrote recently, I don't think that having a kitchen-sink plugins repository is a good way to solve this. Eventually that repository will get too big. It's better to create a new repository for each new module (or possibly for a couple of related modules, but they should be more related th

Re: [log4cxx] Current State

Guten Tag Robert Middleton, am Samstag, 20. Januar 2018 um 04:00 schrieben Sie: > As prompted by the discussion last week about the state of log4cxx, is > there a current blocker(apart from Thorsten's time) halting a release > of log4cxx/regular maintenance? The PGP-keys of whoever is releasing n