+1 :-) I only have very limited time frames available to hack on log4net but am happy to help wherever help is needed.
For instance we have to fix the build pipeline to have something to rely on and allow contributions to be sanity checked by tests. On 8 May 2018 5:05 p.m., "Matt Sicker" <[email protected]> wrote: Please feel free! Our bandwidth for log4net is a bit less since there are less developers here familiar with C#, but we love contributions. :) On 7 May 2018 at 17:52, William Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > I gotcha, if there is interest Id like to get a pr started. > > On Mon, May 7, 2018, 1:25 PM Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Log4j and Log4net don't share any code, just similar architectures. As > for > > why we haven't merged that into log4net, that may because it either was > > never noticed or the authors never attempted to donate it upstream in the > > first place. > > > > On 7 May 2018 at 12:22, William Davis <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Ok then, so are the same Async Appenders available in Log4Net that are > in > > > Log4j ? > > > Here are some one I'm using: > > > https://github.com/cjbhaines/Log4Net.Async > > > (my .net standard port: https://github.com/wjdavis5/Log4Net.Async) > > > Also been looking into an Async Buffering Appender. Just seems we could > > get > > > so much more value out of the core product if these were rolled in. > (And > > I > > > wouldnt have to struggle to get .net core support from ill maintained > > > repos.) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 10:04 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Oh, no worries, you're on the correct list! > > > > > > > > On 7 May 2018 at 09:02, William Davis <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sorry I meant to send this to the Log4Net distro > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Like the Kafka appender's async option? Or like the async logger > > and > > > > > > appenders? > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7 May 2018 at 07:38, Remko Popma <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Log4j core provides about 4 flavours of async logging, several > of > > > > which > > > > > > > use non-blocking data structures. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you link to the ones you think should be included? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remko > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shameless plug) Every java main() method deserves > > > > http://picocli.info > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 7, 2018, at 14:15, William Davis < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've noticed that there are several Async implementations of > > > > standard > > > > > > > > appenders out in the wild. Is there a reason none of these > have > > > > made > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > way into the core product? Is it just b/c no one has taken > the > > > time > > > > > to > > > > > > > do a > > > > > > > > pull request, or is there some other reason? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've had several projects where we need the non-blocking > nature > > > of > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > appenders to achieve desired performance. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
