Following up on this, I contacted the package maintainer and they said they are willing to transfer ownership to the log4net project.
> On Aug 26, 2015, at 8:15 AM, jerem...@gowdy.me wrote: > > If we can't force the owner of the nuget log4net package to work with us, why > not package it as log4net official or apache-log4net. I don't get why > packaging is off topic for the release of a .NET library. If we are seeking > to increase the user base, I would think an official package in the package > manager of choice would be a key component of that. > > On Aug 26, 2015, at 8:06 AM, Dominik Psenner <a...@apache.org > <mailto:a...@apache.org>> wrote: > >> Hi again, >> >> I wanted this discussion to stay open for a week and that time is over now. >> For now I'll try to answer questions and clarify a few things so that you >> get another chance to raise your voice. >> >> > Will the code be compatible with the current version? >> >> The API should stay more or less the same, but eventually a few things will >> be dropped. Among them will be properties like IsDebugEnabled, which could >> be handled very well internally with late evaluation of log messages. >> >> > Just be bold and embrace .NET 4.5 >> >> I'm not at all against it, but there's almost no profit to target 4.5 over >> 4.0, but with 4.0 we have a much larger audience. Personally I do simply >> want the #ifdefs to be gone for good. That said, I've the impression that >> everything that doesn't fit into log4net core only with #ifdefs should be >> dropped. >> >> > Forget supporting the current appenders. >> > I would approve of dropping high complexity, low reward appenders like >> > outdated .NET remoting. >> >> We will add filters and appenders that are easy to implement (or already >> there) for the targeted framework. To be honest, only what causes more >> trouble that it is worth will be dropped. :-) >> >> > What we do need with the appender interface is install/uninstall hooks. >> >> Nice idea. This will have to be worked out as early as possible such that >> the new API can be designed to fit the needs. >> >> > We also need to take ownership of nuget packaging log4net. >> >> This discussion is off topic and has already been dealt with. We simply >> cannot force the owner of the nuget package to work with us and that's it. >> >> > Personally I'd like to emphasize >> >> [1] To make this come true there will be the need for a few helping hands >> >> Thanks Justin, I'm glad that you're willing to lend a hand! >> >> Everyone else, please note that the more hands we can get, the faster and >> easier it is going to be. Thus, volunteers, jump out of your bushes! >> >> That's it from me, for now; >> >> >> 2015-08-22 19:09 GMT+02:00 Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org >> <mailto:bode...@apache.org>>: >> On 2015-08-19, <dpsen...@apache.org <mailto:dpsen...@apache.org>> wrote: >> >> > Last night I've dreamed a dream and in that dream the release process of >> > log4net happened on a flick of a switch. >> >> A wonderful dream. >> >> Personally I'd like to emphasize >> >> > [1] To make this come true there will be the need for a few helping hands >> > and therefore this message goes to people that use log4net and want log4net >> > to be revived. >> >> even stronger. >> >> Stefan >> >> -- >> Dominik Psenner >>
