Well, I cant speak for the entire test suite, but we having been running
log4net in production on dotnet core since it was released and my ELK stack
seems to be getting lots of logs :) I'll reach out to Nick at SE and see if
he can expound upon his previous message.
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:55 PM
Interesting discussion in that pull request, yet it's missing links to hard
facts what these functionalities, new features, smaller install area, no
downsides etc actually are. Have you links to that information?
I've said numerous times now that we don't even run the test suite against
netstandar
Not a bad conversation to have. I would direct you to read this PR from the
SE.Redis library where I argued against netstandard 2.0 inclusion at one
point.
https://github.com/StackExchange/StackExchange.Redis/pull/767
It would probably be worth while to provide explicit support for it. (with
out a
Sure. This will however block by itself and take care of preserving
compatibility with the ancient frameworks. With this mentioned, today might
be a good day to start a poll on what frameworks log4net should continue to
support. In the last days I once more spent numerous hours with the build
infra
Thanks. I am so swamped at work right now I probably won’t get anything done
with this for a week or so.
Ralph
> On May 10, 2018, at 7:46 AM, Remko Popma wrote:
>
> Ralph, the doc changes are improvements but not ground to veto a release.
> I haven't actually tried it yet.
>
> On Wed, May 9,
Perhaps, but looking at that implementation I see that it is locking in a
few places on append. Could this be made a little better by using built in
ConcurrentCollection types like the ConcurrentQueue?
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 1:23 AM, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> This proposal sounds like the buffer
Ralph, the doc changes are improvements but not ground to veto a release.
I haven't actually tried it yet.
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:47 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> I've never worked in a domain where audit logging is used, so I won't have
> much feedback about that. I will, however, provide a more
