Re: [GitHub] logging-log4j2 pull request #202: [LOG4J2-2391] Improve ThrowableProxy perfo...

I have to wonder why using the security manager is faster than using StackWalker. StackWalker was created just for this purpose. Is the way it is implemented the problem? Ralph > On Aug 7, 2018, at 1:34 PM, cakofony wrote: > > GitHub user cakofony opened a pull request: > >https://githu

Re: [GitHub] logging-log4j2 pull request #202: [LOG4J2-2391] Improve ThrowableProxy perfo...

ts >>> StackTraceBenchmark.defaultJava8thrpt3 113965.921 ± >>> 119706.986 ops/s >>> StackTraceBenchmark.securityManager thrpt3 788004.237 ± 82578.567 >>> ops/s >>> StackTraceBenchmark.stackWalker thrpt3 182902.031 ± >&g

Re: [GitHub] logging-log4j2 pull request #202: [LOG4J2-2391] Improve ThrowableProxy perfo...

>> StackTraceBenchmark.securityManager thrpt3 788004.237 ± 82578.567 >> ops/s >> StackTraceBenchmark.stackWalker thrpt3 182902.031 ± >> 39018.395 ops/s >> >> >> -ck >> >> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Ralph Goers >

Re: [GitHub] logging-log4j2 pull request #202: [LOG4J2-2391] Improve ThrowableProxy perfo...

d by ThrowableProxy over a Throwable. > > I will take a look at flagging ThrowableProxy class loading instead of > disabling ThrowableProxy entirely when I have a moment. > > Thanks, > -ck > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:36 AM, Ralph Goers > wrote: >> What is the purpo

Re: [GitHub] logging-log4j2 pull request #202: [LOG4J2-2391] Improve ThrowableProxy perfo...

t; at this. > > I'm working on a benchmark with a larger stack to simulate conditions > in a real application as well. > > -ck > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 12:47 PM, Ralph Goers > wrote: >> What I don’t understand is that ThrowableProxy seems to be doing a whole &g

Re: [GitHub] logging-log4j2 pull request #202: [LOG4J2-2391] Improve ThrowableProxy perfo...

d stack trace benchmark committed somewhere? I don't see > it in log4j-perf. > My benchmark isn't very pretty either, I'm open to ideas for cleaning > up the implementation. > > -ck > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Ralph Goers > wrote: >> I cre

Re: [GitHub] logging-log4j2 pull request #202: [LOG4J2-2391] Improve ThrowableProxy perfo...

Looking at your latest commit, your number looks similar to mine. Ralph > On Aug 9, 2018, at 11:14 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > No, I haven’t committed it. I started looking into it but got sidetracked > with having to earn a living. > > Ralph > >> On Aug 9, 2018

Re: [log4j] A API or pattern for better stack trace logging

1. Define a Marker public static final Marker EXCEPTION_MESSAGE = MarkerManager.getMarker(“EXCEPTION_MESSAGE”); 2. Use the Marker logger.info(EXCEPTION_MESSAGE, execution); 3. Use the MarkerPatternSelector Ralph > On Aug 12, 2018, at 8:47 AM, Gary

Re: [log4j] A API or pattern for better stack trace logging

Also, if you want to do something more complex you can implement your own PatternSelector or use the ScriptPatternSelect. Ralph > On Aug 12, 2018, at 8:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All: > > In our server, there are certain kinds of exceptions that are caught that I > want processed in a

Re: Java 11 Compatibility Check of library : Apache log4j

I tried to reject the moderation request for this as it was the second time we have receive this message and he is spamming multiple lists. Unfortunately, someone else accepted it. Ralph > On Aug 22, 2018, at 7:55 AM, Remko Popma wrote: > > Krzysztof, > > Can you explain a bit more about who

Log4j 2.3.1?

A request to integrate https://gitlab.com/thiesw/log4j2-Java6-extras was made in one of the pull requests. This project targets Log4j 2.3. According to Nexus 13% of the downloads last month were for 2.3. So the questions are: 1. Do we want to inc

Re: Conditional appender enablement

We have an appended selector for this. Why not us it? Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 15, 2018, at 11:07 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All: > > At work, we have an installer program that installs one of five log4j > configs depending on what the user selects in a UI. Each of these 5 configs > ca

Re: Conditional appender enablement

If you don’t want to log anything then enable a noop appender that just returns without doing anything Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 15, 2018, at 12:34 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 3:24 PM Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> We have an appended selector fo

Re: Conditional appender enablement

Or make sure it’s logging level causes it to never log Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 15, 2018, at 12:34 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 3:24 PM Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> We have an appended selector for this. Why not us it? >> > > Hi, >

Vacation

Just to let you know, I am on vacation in Hawaii so. I should have some free time while I am here but responses to email will be delayed during the next 10 days. Ralph

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j Kotlin API 1.0.0-rc1

Finally got a chance to look at the release. Sorry for taking so long. +1 Ralph > On Jul 7, 2018, at 9:10 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Hi all, we have a brand new Log4j API to release, and this is the first > release candidate to work with. Below are links to various pieces of the > release for

Re: [Discuss] [VOTE] Release Log4j Kotlin API 1.0.0-rc1

ds, > Raman > > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:31 PM Matt Sicker wrote: >> >> Looks like I added the shasum files already. Please feel free to review >> this release. As it's the first version, I'm guessing I might need another >> RC, but that depends

Re: [GitHub] logging-log4j2 pull request #202: [LOG4J2-2391] Improve ThrowableProxy perfo...

ultJava8thrpt3 113965.921 ± > 119706.986 ops/s > StackTraceBenchmark.securityManager thrpt3 788004.237 ± 82578.567 > ops/s > StackTraceBenchmark.stackWalker thrpt3 182902.031 ± > 39018.395 ops/s > > > -ck > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 7:20 P

Re: [Discuss] [VOTE] Release Log4j Kotlin API 1.0.0-rc1

> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 13:40, Matt Sicker wrote: > >> +1 from me. >> >> I'll finish up the release tonight. Thanks for reviewing, and sorry for >> not getting back to this sooner! >> >> On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 12:40, Remko Popma wrote: &

Re: [Discuss] [VOTE] Release Log4j Kotlin API 1.0.0-rc1

Despite that, did you finish this? Ralph > On Oct 10, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > BTW - Remko voted +1 but this is a discussion thread, not the vote thread. At > least for me they show up as separate threads. > > Ralph > >> On Sep 24, 2018, at

Re: [log4j2] Release 2.11.2?

I don’t recall you asking about a 2.11.2 release previously. I would think I might be able to do it on Thanksgiving weekend. Ralph > On Oct 10, 2018, at 6:20 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All: > > I can't find the old thread where I asked this originally but what are your > thoughts on rele

Re: [Discuss] [VOTE] Release Log4j Kotlin API 1.0.0-rc1

t; >> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 18:52, Ralph Goers >> wrote: >> >>> Despite that, did you finish this? >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>>> On Oct 10, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Ralph Goers >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> BTW

Re: [Discuss] [VOTE] Release Log4j Kotlin API 1.0.0-rc1

Oh, I guess that is what you published with mvn deploy. I would guess you need to release it again. Without knowing what the javadoc errors are I’m not sure what to tell you. Ralph > On Oct 12, 2018, at 12:55 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > I am seeing a staging repo that it looks like

Re: [Audit] Running the catalog editor externally

The editor is not designed to be used by multiple users at the same time. Setting it up as a remote client will make people think you can do that. Ralph > On Oct 15, 2018, at 2:39 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Now I know the docs suggest running the catalog editor locally, but how > well supporte

Re: [Audit] Running the catalog editor externally

addition, managing the repos on the remote server could be messy. Ralph > On Oct 15, 2018, at 2:54 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Is that nontrivial to support? > > On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 at 16:48, Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> The editor is not designed to be used by mult

Re: [Audit] Running the catalog editor externally

ote: > > Ah yeah, thanks for the context. So what if I ran a unique instance per > user? I suppose that could still end up in merge conflicts if two users try > to push a change concurrently. > > On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 at 20:54, Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> Yes, it would be non

Re: [log4j2] Gitbox

We had a vote thread in April where we agreed to do it. It was followed up on in June. It seems Matt was busy and it apparently fell through the cracks. Ralph > On Oct 18, 2018, at 4:54 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All: > > Any appetite for moving Log4j 2 from git-wip to gitbox? > > Gary

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Log4j Kotlin API 1.0.0 RC2

-1 The source zip is supposed to be an exact copy of the source repo. It is missing lots of stuff from the root directory, including the license and notice. Ralph > On Nov 3, 2018, at 10:46 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > It's time again to try and release Log4j Kotlin API 1.0.0. > > GPG keys: >

Re: [log4j] Help needed with master TimeFilterTest

Did you make a Jira for that? I would like to focus on 3.0 but I have so little time… FWIW, I just ran the build on my laptop and had no problems. Ralph > On Nov 4, 2018, at 9:37 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 9:34 AM Matt Sicker wrote: > >> The day of daylight saving ti

Re: [log4j] Java 8 and java.time

I am sure we can find a way to eliminate our custom time code or base it on java.time. Whether it performs better or not would require that it be tested and compared. It wouldn’t be a simple matter to create a JMH benchmark and create our time formatting against java.time. Ralph > On Nov 4, 20

Re: [log4j] Better time values in config files.

I have no problem with this but would think it would be something we would want to do in 3.0 and not 2.x. Rather than to keep introducing features to 2.x I’d like to concentrate a bit on figuring out what things really need to be changed for a 3.0 release and adding new significant features ther

Re: [log4j] Toward 3.0

How much are we impacting the API? I don’t know that package naming is required if the API is compatible. I am hoping this doesn’t impact the API much. I’d prefer this just be log4j 3.x. Log4j 2 3.x is just really weird. I wouldn’t say a module shouldn’t have any optional dependencies but it s

Re: [log4j] Toward 3.0

based on Module Layers. 4. LOG4J2-2170 Ralph > On Nov 5, 2018, at 9:22 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > How much are we impacting the API? I don’t know that package naming is > required if the API is compatible. I am hoping this doesn’t impact the API > much. > > I’d prefer t

Re: [log4j] Toward 3.0

is is quite tricky of course. > > Gary > > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 9:33 PM Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> Some other features I need/want to do: >> >> 1. LOG4J2-1137 >> 2. Allow the SocketAppender to specify multiple IP addresses and allow >> either roun

Re: [log4j] Toward 3.0

iate flush. The current >>> implementations may surface a failure to the attempt to log an end of >>> batch, but don't provide a mechanism to retry queued or buffered >>> events. >>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 1:31 PM Gary Gregory >> wrote

Re: [log4j] ignoreExceptions

I don’t see any issues. Ralph > On Nov 11, 2018, at 8:15 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All, > > It would be handy to have ignoreExceptions set on the Appenders XML element > and then have all appenders inherit that setting. > > Can you see any issue with that? > > Gary

Re: @PluginBuilderAttribute and primitive Objects

You want to put a list of SQL statements into a log4j2 configuration? I’m not sure why but something about that makes me uncomfortable. Ralph > On Nov 13, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:47 AM Matt Sicker wrote: > >> That might already be supported for co

Re: @PluginBuilderAttribute and primitive Objects

ns.apache.org/proper/commons-dbcp/apidocs/org/apache/commons/dbcp2/PoolableConnectionFactory.html >>> >>> And I'd rather support all settings than cherry-pick. >>> >>> Reference: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2505 >>> >>> Ga

Re: @PluginBuilderAttribute and primitive Objects

;> >>> >>>>> autoCommitOnReturn="true" >>> cacheState="false" >>> defaultAutoCommit="false" >>> defaultCatalog="" >>> defaultQueryTimeoutSeconds

Re: [log4j] Toward 3.0

> On Nov 16, 2018, at 1:14 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 12:30 PM Volkan Yazıcı > wrote: > >> Hey Gary, >> >> *Package Name* >> >> Once every couple of months I found myself helping out people >> for JAR Hell problems since they included wrong Log4j artifact. >> The a

Re: [log4j] Toward 3.0

I asked about that once and someone did come up with a reason as to why they would use it. I’d have to hunt through the archives to find it though. Ralph > On Nov 18, 2018, at 9:17 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Maybe we should deprecate it, but keep it in? The map version is still > useful, but t

Re: [log4j] 2.11.2 release?

That is a distinct possibility. I will first look for low hanging issues I can resolve and then proceed with the release process. I have other work I want to do but that may be targeted at 3.0 only as they are mostly enhancements. Ralph > On Nov 20, 2018, at 6:34 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > H

Re: [log4j2] Gitbox

r soon as well. > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 19:23, Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> We had a vote thread in April where we agreed to do it. It was followed up >> on in June. It seems Matt was busy and it apparently fell through the >> cracks. >> >> Ralp

Re: log4php

The logging project moved all of its repositories to GitBox. So you can either repoint your repo to https://github.com/apache/logging-log4php.git or to https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=logging-log4php.git. You can find a list of all the logging services repos in GitBox at https://gitbox.ap

Re: [log4j] 2.11.2 release?

have that straightened away I will perform the release. Ralph > On Nov 20, 2018, at 4:45 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > I emailed the list about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1246 > and I wonder if this is simple to fix. > > Gary > > On Tue, Nov 20, 201

Re: Building the latest log4cxx from source

FYI - All Apache Logging projects, including log4cxx, have recently been moved to GitBox - which essentially allows committers and contributors to use GitHub directly. So now pull requests can be created at GitHub, reviewed and applied. The log4cxx project would really like help. Several folks h

Re: Jenkins build became unstable: Log4j 2 2.x #3753

No, it means that the fix for 1906 still isn’t perfect. Ralph > On Dec 1, 2018, at 6:21 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Is this failure related to the recent file close issue in the tests? > > Gary > > -- Forwarded message - > From: Apache Jenkins Server > Date: Sat, Dec 1, 2018

Filename too long

Gary, when I clone the git repo to my Windows VM I am getting the error message error: unable to create file log4j-1.2-api/src/test/resources/config-1.2/hadoop/hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-applications/hadoop-yarn-applications-unmanaged-am-launcher/src/test/resources/log4j.properti

Re: Filename too long

Never mind. Figured out the solution. Ralph > On Dec 1, 2018, at 11:06 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > Gary, when I clone the git repo to my Windows VM I am getting the error > message > > error: unable to create file > log4j-1.2-api/src/test/resources/config-1.2/hadoo

[VOTE] Release Log4j Audit 1.0.1 RC1

This is a vote to release Log4j-Audit 1.0.1, the second release of the Log4j Audit project. Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. [] +1, release the artifacts [] -1, don't release because... The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or more if required). All vote

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Log4j Kotlin API 1.0.0 RC3

Sorry for taking so long. I somehow missed this thread. Hopefully others will also review it. +1 Ralph > On Nov 3, 2018, at 1:16 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > GPG keys: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/logging/KEYS > > Signed by Matt Sicker (748F15B2CF9BA8F024155E6ED7C92B70FA1C814D)

Re: Jenkins build is still unstable: Log4j 2 2.x #3757

There are failing commits with the latest timezone fomatting changes. Ralph > On Dec 4, 2018, at 7:37 PM, Apache Jenkins Server > wrote: > > See > > >

[DISCUSS] [VOTE] Release Log4j Audit 1.0.1 RC1

This vote has now been open for 2 1/2 days. Please find the time to review it. I should also note that the Kotlin vote has been open for over a month now. Please review that as well. Ralph > On Dec 2, 2018, at 8:42 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > This is a vote to release Log4j-Au

Builds failing due to timestamp changes.

Gary, the builds have been getting failed unit tests since you made the changes for the additional timestamp patterns. Can you please look at these and figure out what is not working? Thanks, Ralph https://builds.apache.org/job/Log4j%202%202.x/3758/#showFailuresLink

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j Audit 1.0.1 RC1

ApplicationConfiguration.java:[19,23] > error: package javax.annotation does not exist > [ERROR] > C:\temp\rc\logging-log4j-audit\log4j-catalog\log4j-catalog-git\src\test\java\org\apache\logging\log4j\catalog\git\config\ApplicationConfiguration.java:[56,5] > error: cannot find symbol

Re: What's left for 2.11.2?

I am really waiting for confirmation that the fix for LOG4J2-1906 is working correctly. You initially had an error on Windows but it sounds like it went away. Jenkins failed once on it but hasn’t failed since. The report of LOG4J2-2517 is related but since I can’t reproduce that it isn’t a block

Re: What's left for 2.11.2?

ker wrote: > > Speaking of Windows, I recently installed Parallels for testing things in > Windows (generally Windows-specific bugs), so going forward, I'll try to > verify our releases in multiple operating systems. > > On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 12:46, Ralph Goers wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j Audit 1.0.1 RC1

e building against below. Ralph > On Dec 6, 2018, at 2:06 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Ralph, FTR, may you post the proper git URL and tag we should use to > validate this RC SVP? > > Gary > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 9:47 AM Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> Thanks, I th

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j Audit 1.0.1 RC1

I edited the message below to get rid of the extra stuff my email client must have added. Ralph > On Dec 8, 2018, at 12:16 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > Gary, > > I did both > > git clone -b log4j-audit-1.0.1-rc1 > https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j-audit.git

Re: [logging-log4j2] branch release-2.x updated: Enhance direct write test. Add new OnStartup test

git > > > The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/release-2.x by this push: > new 3a6f602 Enhance direct write test. Add new OnStartup test > 3a6f602 is described below > > commit 3a6f6022130b1eee6100c633b988cd8cb091580c > Author: Ralph Goers > AuthorDate:

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j Audit 1.0.1 RC1

g? > > Gary > > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 12:32 PM Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> I edited the message below to get rid of the extra stuff my email client >> must have added. >> >> Ralph >> >>> On Dec 8, 2018, at 12:16 PM, Ralph Goers >>

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j Audit 1.0.1 RC1

+1 Ralph > On Dec 2, 2018, at 8:42 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > This is a vote to release Log4j-Audit 1.0.1, the second release of the Log4j > Audit project. > > Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. > [] +1, release the artifacts &

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Log4j Audit 1.0.1 rc1

The vote has passed received binding +1 votes from Gary Gregory, Matt Sicker and Ralph Goers. It also received a +1 vote from David Olorundare. No other votes were cast. I will continue the release process later today. Ralph

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Log4j-Audit 1.0.1 released

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

Re: [apache/logging-log4j-audit] maven-compiler-plugin 3.8.0 (#13)

Matt, Did you create a Jira issue and add that to changes.xml? Just like Log4j I’d like to track all the changes with Jira. Ralph > On Dec 14, 2018, at 10:01 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Merged #13 into > master. > > — > You are receivin

Re: [apache/logging-log4j-audit] maven-compiler-plugin 3.8.0 (#13)

Thanks! Ralph > On Dec 14, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Done in LOG4J2-2521. > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 13:38, Matt Sicker wrote: > >> I did not. Will do so. Wasn't sure about maven plugin changes. >> >> On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 1

LOG4J2-1906

I fixed the problem causing LOG4J2-1906 a couple of weeks ago but immediately after committing it the unit test failed in Jenkins. I have tried modifying the status logger to capture the events that are generated during the test and to print them if it fails, but since introducing that change I

Please vote

This RC Vote has been open for almost 2 months now… Ralph > On Dec 2, 2018, at 9:53 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > Sorry for taking so long. I somehow missed this thread. Hopefully others will > also review it. > > +1 > > Ralph > >> On Nov 3, 2018, at 1:16 P

Re: Where is the latest code of apache chainsaw

All the ASF repos have moved to GitHub and are mirrored to a Git that the ASF maintains. You can find chainsaw at https://github.com/apache/logging-chainsaw. Ralph > On Jan 11, 2019, at 6:15 AM, Tzachi Dar wrote: > > I would like to send a short update, and the repository ( > https://git-wip-u

Re: [log4j] 2.11.2 release?

s the patches I submitted. I also plan to enhance this to support notifications from Spring Cloud Config. Ralph > On Jan 22, 2019, at 10:09 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > Well… > > I have a need for the logging configuration to be cloud-enabled. i.e - I need > for the app to

Re: [log4j] 2.11.2 release?

ote: > > Perhaps not for 2.11.2 which I'd rather have sooner than later (RERO): > Would any of this work allow me to plug in Apache Commons VFS in order for > Log4j to get the contents of its configuration? > > Gary > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 1:08 AM Ralph Goers > wrote:

Re: [log4j] 2.11.2 release?

seems no one else has had an interest in doing it. I’m not sure why. Ralph > On Jan 25, 2019, at 6:37 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > I haven’t built direct support for using Commons VFS, but it could. There are > two parts to solve. For any protocol you want to use you need to impl

Re: [log4j] 2.11.2 release?

nal. The URL scheme could > be "vfs:" or it might be nicer to say somewhere "resolve using VFS" so you > can just use a VFS URL. > > Gary > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 8:37 AM Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> I haven’t built direct support for using Commo

Re: [log4j] 2.11.2 release?

the advantage of being in > java.base for Java 9+. > > I'd also support a new major version of VFS using NIO2, but that's a > project in itself. > > On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 09:52, Ralph Goers wrote: >> >> I’ll look through the code over the weekend and let yo

Re: [log4j] 2.11.2 release?

lph >>> >>>> On Jan 25, 2019, at 8:13 AM, Gary Gregory >> wrote: >>>> >>>> My server already depends on VFS, so I do not mind the additional dep, >> but >>>> for Log4j-Core, the dep should obviously be optional. The UR

Re: Feature discussion: A memory appender that can be triggered to dump in-memory logging messages to file

I sent a reply mentioning the same Jira issue yesterday but for some reason it doesn’t appear to have made it to the mailing list. Ralph > On Jan 28, 2019, at 2:40 PM, Remko Popma wrote: > > This reminds me of a JIRA ticket that Ralph raised. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-113

[VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc1

This is a vote to release Log4j 2.11.2, the next version of the Log4j 2 project. Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. [] +1, release the artifacts [] -1, don't release because... The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or more if required). All votes are welco

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc1

>> I've run tests on a few projects I maintain, results are passing so >> far. I'll have a few more sets of results in the morning. >> >> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 7:05 PM Ralph Goers >> wrote: >>> >>> This is a vote to release Log4j 2.11.2,

Discuss [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc1

erLocationTest.testMemMapLocation(MemoryMappedFileAppenderLocationTest.java:75) > > Is this a real error or a problem in the test itself? > > I've never used this appender and I do not need it but I need other fixes > in this release urgently for Java 8, so I am still +1. >

Re: Discuss [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc1

OK. I will give those a try and see what may be going on. Ralph > On Feb 4, 2019, at 7:35 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:30 AM Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> Umm, what do you mean by “deal with the removal of >> sun.reflect.Reflection”? AFAIK

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc1

ating the WriterAppender.newBuilder() > implementation: > https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/commit/61b77dfb6ec5f69117f7892ccb940e34b5223954#diff-54bfdf411224aeea892379ecd25a13b9L40 > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:27 AM Ralph Goers wrote: >> >> I’m a little confused. When I look a

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc1

https://github.com/search?l=Java&q=WriterAppender.newBuilder%28%29&type=Code >> >> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 10:24 AM Carter Kozak wrote: >>> >>> That is correct, the builder had no usages inside of our codebase, >>> which would have caused the compile

[VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc2

This is a vote to release Log4j 2.11.2, the next version of the Log4j 2 project. Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. [] +1, release the artifacts [] -1, don't release because... The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or more if required). All votes are welco

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc2

- > [INFO] Total time: 15:15 min > [INFO] Finished at: 2019-02-05T16:33:44-05:00 > [INFO] > > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal org.revapi:revapi-maven-plugin:0.10.5:check > (default) on project log4j-core: The follo

[VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc3

This is a vote to release Log4j 2.11.2, the next version of the Log4j 2 project. Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. [] +1, release the artifacts [] -1, don't release because... The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or more if required). All votes are welco

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc3

My +1 Ralph > On Feb 5, 2019, at 7:29 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > This is a vote to release Log4j 2.11.2, the next version of the Log4j 2 > project. > > Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. > [] +1, release the artifacts > [] -

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Log4j 2.11.2-rc3

This vote has passed with +1 votes from Gary Gregory, Carter Kozak, Matt Sicker, Remko Popma, and Ralph Goers. No other votes were cast. I will continue with the release process. Ralph

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Log4j 2.11.2 released

The Apache Log4j 2 team is pleased to announce the Log4j 2.11.2 release! Apache Log4j is a well known framework for logging application behavior. Log4j 2 is an upgrade to Log4j that provides significant improvements over its predecessor, Log4j 1.x, and provides many other modern features such as

Re: Error on mvn install on master branch

Please checkout the latest from master. 3.0 is still under development and changes are being made to clean things up and make the modules conform to the Java module system. It now uses RevAPI to track changes so it compares against the last 2.x release. The errors you are seeing are from it ide

Re: [ALL] Using Dependabot for automatic dependency updates?

I have mixed feelings. Gary has been manually doing this for quite a while and I have always had concerns - besides driving his commit count artificially through the roof. Managing dependencies really needs to be managed carefully. When we upgrade a dependency that effectively becomes the minim

Log4j - Docker - Spring Cloud Configuration integration

I have committed more changes to the LOG4J2-913 branch. These are primarily for testing the performance of various appenders in delivering log events to a forwarder / aggregator in a different docker container or somewhere else. I have updated the staging area for the Log4j web site with the re

Re: [log4j] False warning

So we have a logger context that was created with a relative URI. Something is now calling it with an absolute URI. The only way we would know if they are the same would be to convert the relative URI to absolute and see if they are the same. This should be a warning if they do not resolve to t

Re: [log4j] False warning

I should add that fixing this would be a lot lower on my priority list than a bunch of other Jira issues we have. Ralph > On Apr 1, 2019, at 2:57 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > So we have a logger context that was created with a relative URI. Something > is now calling it with an

Re: StackOverflowError at org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.getContext(LogManager.java:194)

That should be doable. We can set a ThreadLocal that indicates one of the APIs was called and check for it in the other and throw an Exception if it is found. Create a Jira issue. Ralph > On Apr 11, 2019, at 8:09 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Yup, too many bridges on the classpath caused an infi

Re: JDK version for building

I am not sure what the concern here is. We build releases using Java 7 for most of the Log4j build and build with Java 9 for certain components that require features that were added there. Log4j 2 2.x is supported on Java 7 and above. Log4j 2.3.0, which is still under development, will requir

BasicLogEventEntity

Gary, You removed deprecated code for 3.0 in the master branch. You removed the getContextMap() method in BasicLogEventEntity but did not replace it with anything to retrieve the Context Map data. The Javadoc still reverences the getContextMap() method and so causes the build to fail when gener

Asciidoc for site documents

The master branch was converted to use AsciiDoctor. To be honest, I don’t remember why. But after trying to create a new page with it I discovered that AsciiDoctor simply doesn’t work properly with the Maven Site Plugin. See https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor-maven-plugin/issues/166

Re: Asciidoc for site documents

ed > weren't markdown but xdoc. > > Also, there was a new asciidoctor release just the other day. Unsure > if it's related. > > On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 10:34, Ralph Goers wrote: >> >> The master branch was converted to use AsciiDoctor. To be honest, I don’

Re: Asciidoc for site documents

ject than what I was > referencing. > > So is this just not possible to fix? I'd really hate to have to go back to > xdoc. > > On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 11:48, Ralph Goers wrote: >> >> The issue isn’t marked as fixed. The problem I am having is that tables are

Re: Asciidoc for site documents

e for the > issue, it seems like the developer is willing to help, we just need to > provide PRs or a description of what we'd like to change... > > Gary > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 12:48 PM Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> The issue isn’t marked as fixed. The proble

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >