yes we discussed about it.
That one reason why we should not activate it by default.
We'll never find a solution that will satisfy everybody
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Robert Scholte wrote:
> I've tested this on Windows, there's only one small issue: the info-text
> is probably black, whic
Just tested it.
It's working fine
Thx a lot.
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Arnaud,
>
> It's all in there now. While I was fixing the logging in embedded mode for
> SLF4J Simple, I updated the Logback branch to do the same.
>
> I had to patch SLF4J Simple to get around s
ANSI can set the BG color...
Gary
On Dec 9, 2012, at 8:25, Robert Scholte wrote:
> I've tested this on Windows, there's only one small issue: the info-text is
> probably black, which makes it unreadable on the default background-color,
> which is black as well.
> The rest looks great!
>
> Op
I've tested this on Windows, there's only one small issue: the info-text
is probably black, which makes it unreadable on the default
background-color, which is black as well.
The rest looks great!
Op Mon, 03 Dec 2012 14:47:24 +0100 schreef Olivier Lamy :
2012/12/3 Marc Pasteur :
hi,
For
Arnaud,
It's all in there now. While I was fixing the logging in embedded mode for
SLF4J Simple, I updated the Logback branch to do the same.
I had to patch SLF4J Simple to get around some static initialization that
doesn't work in embedded mode so I haven't updated trunk, but the Logback
bran
On 04.12.2012 19:18, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> I've been talking to Ceki about configuration in SLF4J as there is
> really no way to change the log level without assuming an
> implementation. If that's the way then for embedding the user can
> change the SLF4J implementation but for the CLI this wil
I did that in the branches using sys props
INFO
When starting and before any slf4j access, MavenCli check -q or -X or
none of both and correctly set the value to the level
(INFO,ERROR,DEBUG)
Works fine for all slf4j impls using this naming convention.
2012/12/4 Jaso
On Dec 4, 2012, at 9:44 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
> Jason,
>
> I'll test more later but FYI it seems that your logback branch doesn't
> support options -X/--debug
>
I've been talking to Ceki about configuration in SLF4J as there is really no
way to change the log level without assuming an
Jason,
I'll test more later but FYI it seems that your logback branch doesn't
support options -X/--debug
cheers
Arnaud
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> I already have started a logback version, but I don't think this should
> affect rolling the 3.1.0.
>
> On Dec 1, 20
works fine but as someone (don't remember who... arnaud maybe) said the
color for info message is black so... not so readable on a black background
:-)
for "la vie en rose" i've to made a patch as only MAGENTA is allowed at the
moment but that could be cute :-)
it works neither in intellij nor in
I had the feedback (not tested myself) that the log4j2 (I suppose it is the
same for the logback) adds colors in netbeans console.
Arnaud
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/3 Marc Pasteur :
> > hi,
> >
> >
> > For the record according to log4j2 docs [1] you need some
yes it is the same thing for logback version
For sure we'll provided it by default the day we'll provide this feature.
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Marc Pasteur wrote:
> hi,
>
>
> For the record according to log4j2 docs [1] you need some additional
> library to make this works on Windows.
>
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/3 Marc Pasteur :
> > hi,
> >
> >
> > For the record according to log4j2 docs [1] you need some additional
> > library to make this works on Windows.
> > So if you don't want to display some ←[37m[ stuffs in the console
> jansi.jar
> >
2012/12/3 Marc Pasteur :
> hi,
>
>
> For the record according to log4j2 docs [1] you need some additional
> library to make this works on Windows.
> So if you don't want to display some ←[37m[ stuffs in the console jansi.jar
> mut be put on maven/lib/ext folder
>
> Can it be "by default" ?
for sur
hi,
For the record according to log4j2 docs [1] you need some additional
library to make this works on Windows.
So if you don't want to display some ←[37m[ stuffs in the console jansi.jar
mut be put on maven/lib/ext folder
Can it be "by default" ?
[1] http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual
+1
I don't think we'll have another minor release before the end of the year.
For sure it won't be included in a bug fix release.
We already release a minor release without (or so few) end-user value, we
won't start to add new feature in a bug fix release :-)
Arnaud
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:33 P
Thanks a lot to have pushed it.
I tested it with success
I like it, at least something that will improve the user experience soon.
Note : Like Olivier's branch the default logging setup has an issue because
the default color is set to black (or white) which are backgrounds colors
commonly used. Thi
I agree but sincerely I'm sure that less than 0,01% of our users will
customize their logs.
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Anders Hammar wrote:
> > In any case doing a choice nowadays for 3.1.0 won't prevent us to change
> it
> > in the future. I really hope that the ability to switch from a l
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On Dec 1, 2012, at 1:42 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
>
> > Ok. Yes that's sure it has to be discussed. That's why I reopened the
> subject.
> > About the implementation :
> > * as a user I have really no preference, I just want the feature
>
I'm going to start the preparation for rolling the release.
Thanks,
Jason
--
Jason van Zyl
Founder & CTO, Sonatype
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
-
Our achievements
ive successor of log4j1.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> From: Jason van Zyl
>> To: Maven Developers List
>> Sent: Sunday, December 2, 2012 12:21 AM
>> Subject: Re: Re-spinning 3.1.0
>>
>>
>> On
;To: Maven Developers List
>Sent: Sunday, December 2, 2012 12:21 AM
>Subject: Re: Re-spinning 3.1.0
>
>
>On Dec 1, 2012, at 3:11 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
>
>> Le samedi 1 décembre 2012 10:08:21 Jason van Zyl a écrit :
>>> [1]:
>> http://svnsearch.org
I'm doing more comparison for myself, that can be useful for others
for the config format:
http://logback.qos.ch/manual/configuration.html
vs
http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/configuration.html
I don't see much difference
Notice there is no dtd nor schema for both
I like having some he
Le samedi 1 décembre 2012 12:10:43 Stuart McCulloch a écrit :
> You might want to take a look at
> http://logback.qos.ch/manual/layouts.html#coloring for additional
> background
thank you Stuart, really useful
I made the same research for log4j2, to continue my personal comparison and
found "hig
I'm going to hack on the Aether branch for the rest of the day, I'll check in
tomorrow morning to see what others think about the release.
Thanks,
Jason
--
Jason van Zyl
Founder & CTO, Sonatype
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jva
On Dec 1, 2012, at 3:11 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> Le samedi 1 décembre 2012 10:08:21 Jason van Zyl a écrit :
>> [1]:
> http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?path=%2Flogging%2Flog4j%2Flog4j2
>
>
> just for side-by-side comparison:
> https://github.com/qos-ch/logback/graphs/contributo
Le samedi 1 décembre 2012 10:08:21 Jason van Zyl a écrit :
> [1]:
http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?path=%2Flogging%2Flog4j%2Flog4j2
just for side-by-side comparison:
https://github.com/qos-ch/logback/graphs/contributors
-
Olivier can clarify but appears to me to ship all implementations with
configurations to let the user flip.
I don't think anyone can honestly justify shipping Log4J2 by default, I think
Logback is appropriate so he's trying to accommodate everyone's PoV. But I
still think we have to pick an imp
you think works
best and show us.
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: Jason van Zyl
>> To: Maven Developers List
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2012 10:31 PM
>> Subject: Re: Re-spinning 3.1.0
>>
&
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On Dec 1, 2012, at 2:27 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>>
>> I just try to make more than one happy so what is your reason ?
>>
>
> That shipping multiple implementations means we have to support them for no
> particular reason. I think that se
On Dec 1, 2012, at 2:27 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
> I just try to make more than one happy so what is your reason ?
>
That shipping multiple implementations means we have to support them for no
particular reason. I think that setup is fairly convoluted for users, and still
we have really de
If a script or plugin was provided to make changing the implementation easy I
think that would be better. That can be made as simple. I think shipping
optional components is generally a bad practice. It would be like shipping all
the wagon/aether implementations to let people pick. Not really sc
2012/12/1 Jason van Zyl :
>
> On Dec 1, 2012, at 2:17 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> 2012/12/1 Jason van Zyl :
>>> On Dec 1, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>>
>
> I don't think that's particularly easy and additionally opens us up to
> having to specifically support any SLF4J i
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Why do we have to force our users to a specific logging implementation
> than we choose ?
>
Doesn't the product have to establish a default? Isn't that the one
"forced" on the users?
Substitution of the default for alternate impleme
nt: Saturday, December 1, 2012 10:31 PM
> Subject: Re: Re-spinning 3.1.0
>
>
> On Dec 1, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Why do we have to force our users to a specific logging implementation
>> than we choose ?
>
> My counter a
On Dec 1, 2012, at 2:17 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/1 Jason van Zyl :
>> On Dec 1, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
I don't think that's particularly easy and additionally opens us up to
having to specifically support any SLF4J implementation which I don't
2012/12/1 Jason van Zyl :
> On Dec 1, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I don't think that's particularly easy and additionally opens us up to
>>> having to specifically support any SLF4J implementation which I don't think
>>> is wise.
>>>
>> if documented that's not really complic
On Dec 1, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
>> I don't think that's particularly easy and additionally opens us up to
>> having to specifically support any SLF4J implementation which I don't think
>> is wise.
>>
> if documented that's not really complicated.
>
So the process would be
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/1 Jason van Zyl :
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Why do we have to force our users to a specific logging implementation
>>> than we choose ?
>>
>> My counter argument is why don't we? That is
2012/12/1 Jason van Zyl :
>
> On Dec 1, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Why do we have to force our users to a specific logging implementation
>> than we choose ?
>
> My counter argument is why don't we? That is the pattern of most forms of
> integration because trying to ac
On Dec 1, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Why do we have to force our users to a specific logging implementation
> than we choose ?
My counter argument is why don't we? That is the pattern of most forms of
integration because trying to account for many implementations interac
Great emails here. My mention of log4j2 is to get a hard core customer
- maven - in order to make log4j2 better. Whether that is in the best
interest of Maven users and developers is a different question which
you guys know best. I'm fine with Maven jumping on the logback
bandwagon. If there are te
Hi,
Why do we have to force our users to a specific logging implementation
than we choose ?
We can propose variants and at least one as a workaround to maybe fix
sonar issue.
So what I do in the branch called dynamic-logging-impl is a "dynamic"
way of loading the implementation users prefers (def
> In any case doing a choice nowadays for 3.1.0 won't prevent us to change it
> in the future. I really hope that the ability to switch from a logger
> implementation to another won't require several days of developments or I
> really missed something about it.
>
Well, very likely it would affect
On Dec 1, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2012, at 1:42 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
>>
>>> Ok. Yes that's sure it has to be discussed. That's why I reopened the
>>> subject.
>>> About the implementation :
>>> *
OK, 3.1.1 or 3.1-m2 or whatever before Christmas. Let's get this fish
out of the store and move on to the next one.
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Oh do please give us a color console for Christmas :)
>
> Gary
>
> On Dec 1, 2012, at 12:47, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> I alrea
Oh do please give us a color console for Christmas :)
Gary
On Dec 1, 2012, at 12:47, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> I already have started a logback version, but I don't think this should
> affect rolling the 3.1.0.
>
> On Dec 1, 2012, at 6:57 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
>
>> I pushed the prototype de
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On Dec 1, 2012, at 1:42 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
>
>> Ok. Yes that's sure it has to be discussed. That's why I reopened the
>> subject.
>> About the implementation :
>> * as a user I have really no preference, I just want the feature
>>
On Dec 1, 2012, at 1:42 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
> Ok. Yes that's sure it has to be discussed. That's why I reopened the subject.
> About the implementation :
> * as a user I have really no preference, I just want the feature
> * as a developer I played with both and for me these are just logg
I already have started a logback version, but I don't think this should affect
rolling the 3.1.0.
On Dec 1, 2012, at 6:57 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
> I pushed the prototype developed by olivier using log4j2 in the
> branch feature/colorized-console/log4j2
> I updated with latest master changes
I pushed the prototype developed by olivier using log4j2 in the
branch feature/colorized-console/log4j2
I updated with latest master changes
You can test the distro of this code : http://cl.ly/1B1z051O0T10
Tonight I'll try to do a logback version
cheers
Arnaud
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 11:15 AM,
> Gary
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2012, at 5:05, Mark Struberg wrote:
>>
>>> sounds great, have Oliviers branch running locally myself without issues.
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Origi
ruberg wrote:
>
>> sounds great, have Oliviers branch running locally myself without issues.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>> From: Arnaud Héritier
>>> To: Maven Developers List
>>>
> - Original Message -
>> From: Arnaud Héritier
>> To: Maven Developers List
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2012 9:17 AM
>> Subject: Re: Re-spinning 3.1.0
>>
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> Couldn't we have a look at olamy's log4j2
On 1 Dec 2012, at 08:40, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> I just created and fixed MNG-5395 and MNG-5396, which are logger names
> enhancements from the actual values that will give value even with slf4j-
> simple
>
> These should be a starting point for more global discussion about our logging
> convent
ustom injector
(http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/wiki/CustomInjections).
HTH
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: Arnaud Héritier
>> To: Maven Developers List
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2012 10:42 AM
>> Subject: Re: Re-s
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> I just created and fixed MNG-5395 and MNG-5396, which are logger names
> enhancements from the actual values that will give value even with slf4j-
> simple
>
> These should be a starting point for more global discussion about our
> logging
>
Ok. Yes that's sure it has to be discussed. That's why I reopened the subject.
About the implementation :
* as a user I have really no preference, I just want the feature
* as a developer I played with both and for me these are just loggers
. We may organize a fight between Ceki and Ralph but it wo
012 10:42 AM
> Subject: Re: Re-spinning 3.1.0
>
> Ok. Yes that's sure it has to be discussed. That's why I reopened the
> subject.
> About the implementation :
> * as a user I have really no preference, I just want the feature
> * as a developer I played with both a
sounds great, have Oliviers branch running locally myself without issues.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
> From: Arnaud Héritier
> To: Maven Developers List
> Cc:
> Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2012 9:17 AM
> Subject: Re: Re-spinning 3.1.0
>
> Hi Jason,
&g
I just created and fixed MNG-5395 and MNG-5396, which are logger names
enhancements from the actual values that will give value even with slf4j-
simple
These should be a starting point for more global discussion about our logging
conventions then fixed in our global codebase, since IMHO, these i
On Dec 1, 2012, at 12:17 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> Couldn't we have a look at olamy's log4j2 branch to see if we could
> sanitize / merge it to propose at least one change for the end user
> and demonstrate the interest of the change about logs : a colorized
> console.
Not wi
Hi Jason,
Couldn't we have a look at olamy's log4j2 branch to see if we could
sanitize / merge it to propose at least one change for the end user
and demonstrate the interest of the change about logs : a colorized
console.
I remember you did that in mvnsh/teslashell a long time ago (as an
ext
I'm done with the issues that cropped up so I'm ready to re-spin 3.1.0.
Anyone want to add anything or discuss anything before I spin this? I'm not in
any rush so if folks want to talk about logging we can. But given the fact once
SLF4J initializes it can't change the implementation plugins inte
> I'll send a separate thread about the logging options after chatting with
> Simon.
>
I filed MNG-5394 [1] about creating a page on the site where we could
document on how logging should be done in a plugin. This doesn't have to be
done before we release 3.1.0 though as it's a site task.
/Anders
Back to version 2.2:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven.git;a=commitdiff;h=97e8ae273784d86d3cb6b7849848c05919ac4896
On Nov 30, 2012, at 12:08 AM, Anders Hammar wrote:
> Great. And from the JIRAs I take it that the default m-war-p has been
> changed (downgraded to 2.2?).
>
> /Ander
Great. And from the JIRAs I take it that the default m-war-p has been
changed (downgraded to 2.2?).
/Anders
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Just and update on the 3.1.0 saga.
>
> I'm going to fix the NPE in the MavenCli[1] now, and I'm going to chat
> with Simon Brandho
Just and update on the 3.1.0 saga.
I'm going to fix the NPE in the MavenCli[1] now, and I'm going to chat with
Simon Brandhof tomorrow about the use of Logback in Sonar[2]. Kristian also
added the proper disposing the realms[3] by cleaning up some handing of arrays
between threads which were ca
68 matches
Mail list logo
