The old db4o project used a tool
On September 16, 2015 8:58:28 PM Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> wrote:
I was thinking maybe the sheer number of appenders/filters would make it a
lot of effort to port the entire list and just porting the core
infrastructure and maybe one appender just so that you could see something
working might something, while a large effort, wouldn't be huge. But I
guess you're saying it would be a huge effort.
Not sure if there are good java to c# translators and even if there is what
other hurdles you might run into trying to port via a translator, e.g.
platform specific code.
I was assuming you could do it in phases. Maybe the code is somewhat
layered so that the "core" could be ported without too much difficulty.
Thanks,
Nick
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:19:24 -0700
Subject: Re: Why is log4net not more similar to log4j(2)?
From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
To: log4j-u...@logging.apache.org
CC: log4net-user@logging.apache.org
It's not so much that one appender is more code than another. It's all the
infrastructure underneath it all...
Gary
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> wrote:
> Not sure. I was going to ask what a guess on the effort might be. I
> wasn't expecting *huge*. And I guess *huge* is still your guess if we only
> consider the "core" and maybe a single file appender just as a starting
> point?
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:49:22 -0700
> Subject: Re: Why is log4net not more similar to log4j(2)?
> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> To: log4j-u...@logging.apache.org
> CC: log4net-user@logging.apache.org
>
> Porting Log4j 2 would be a *huge* job. Would you use a translator of some
> kind?
> Gary
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> wrote:
> I was debating offering to help. Not that I wouldn't be interested, just
> don't know how much time I could commit. Also, not sure I would be
> interested in "patching" log4net. In my mind the best approach would be to
> port log4j2. I would like the two to be very similar, down to the level
> values, configuration syntax, appenders, filters and extensibility.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:25:19 -0700
>
> Subject: Re: Why is log4net not more similar to log4j(2)?
>
> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
>
> To: log4j-u...@logging.apache.org
>
> CC: log4net-user@logging.apache.org
>
>
>
> I think I read somewhere that log4net was a port of log4j 1.
>
> "Patches welcome" is my motto :-)
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> Sending to both the log4j and log4net mailing lists.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm curious why log4net is not more similar to log4j(2)? Is it because
> there is less development work being done on log4net and log4j had
> significant changes in the 2.0 version? Any chance log4net might become
> more of a "port" of log4j(2) and thus be more similar?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>
> Spring Batch in Action
>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
> Spring Batch in Action
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
--
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
