Re: Log4cxx version

[Ralph Goers]

That is for those involved in the C++ development to decide but I would wonder
a) Besides updating the compiler are there other architectural improvements 
that should be made.
b) How much will the code diverge - would it be possible to share the code that 
is in common somehow or would that just get very messy?
c) What percentage of users are using the older compiler vs the newer?  In 
Log4j’s case we continued to support older versions of Java until we saw usage 
of the version of Java drop below 10% or so. 
d) Will versions of log4cxx created with the older version be incompatible with 
newer versions or lack significant capabilities at some point?

Ralph

> On Aug 22, 2020, at 6:31 PM, Robert Middleton  wrote:
> 
> I'm working on changes for log4cxx at the moment that involve upgrades to
> use C++11 features; that would definitely require a major change in the
> versioning, although the API would be largely the same.  Part of the
> question with that as well is what platforms and compilers are supported,
> as Thorsten uses a very old compiler.  So would it make sense to have two
> branches for development, the "legacy" 0.XX version and a new 1.XX version
> that depends on (at least) C++11?
> 
> -Robert Middleton
> 
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 4:30 PM Stephen Webb  wrote:
> 
>> I would completely support that change.
>> 
>> On Sun, Aug 23, 2020, 3:14 AM Ralph Goers 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> In looking at the log4cxx changelog I can’t help notice that the first
>>> release was 17 years ago. After all these years one would expect that the
>>> version should have hit 1.0.0 at least 10-15 years ago. Isn’t it time to
>>> correct that?
>>> 
>>> Ralph
>>> 
>> 

Re: GitHub Actions CI failure on release-2.x

[Matt Sicker]

Ok, so whatever the issue is is a problem in both branches now.

On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 at 09:56, Matt Sicker  wrote:
>
> I’ve been modifying build settings in master lately that haven’t been merged 
> back to this branch. I’d assume there’s a difference in the pom file here. 
> I’ll take a closer look later today.
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 04:31 Volkan Yazıcı  wrote:
>>
>> GitHub Actions CI build is failing on release-2.x
>>
>>  with the
>>
>> following error:
>>
>>
>>
>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
>>
>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-toolchains-plugin:1.1:toolchain (default) on
>>
>> project log4j-api-java9: Misconfigured toolchains. Non-existing JDK home
>>
>> configuration at
>>
>> /Users/runner/work/logging-log4j2/logging-log4j2/${env.JAVA_HOME_8_X64} ->
>>
>> [Help 1]
>>
>> org.apache.maven.lifecycle.LifecycleExecutionException: Failed to execute
>>
>> goal org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-toolchains-plugin:1.1:toolchain
>>
>> (default) on project log4j-api-java9: Misconfigured toolchains.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am confused and clueless, since the very same [GitHub Actions]
>>
>> configuration works perfectly well on "master". Any ideas? Matt?
>>
> --
> Matt Sicker 



-- 
Matt Sicker 

Re: Log4cxx version

[Robert Middleton]

I'm working on changes for log4cxx at the moment that involve upgrades to
use C++11 features; that would definitely require a major change in the
versioning, although the API would be largely the same.  Part of the
question with that as well is what platforms and compilers are supported,
as Thorsten uses a very old compiler.  So would it make sense to have two
branches for development, the "legacy" 0.XX version and a new 1.XX version
that depends on (at least) C++11?

-Robert Middleton

On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 4:30 PM Stephen Webb  wrote:

> I would completely support that change.
>
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2020, 3:14 AM Ralph Goers 
> wrote:
>
> > In looking at the log4cxx changelog I can’t help notice that the first
> > release was 17 years ago. After all these years one would expect that the
> > version should have hit 1.0.0 at least 10-15 years ago. Isn’t it time to
> > correct that?
> >
> > Ralph
> >
>

Re: Log4cxx version

[Stephen Webb]

I would completely support that change.

On Sun, Aug 23, 2020, 3:14 AM Ralph Goers 
wrote:

> In looking at the log4cxx changelog I can’t help notice that the first
> release was 17 years ago. After all these years one would expect that the
> version should have hit 1.0.0 at least 10-15 years ago. Isn’t it time to
> correct that?
>
> Ralph
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4Net 2.0.9

[Davyd McColl]

Oh ok, well, mine is davydm (:

-d


On August 22, 2020 20:49:59 Dominik Psenner  wrote:


Apparently it cant be the email but must be the nuget accounts username,
apologies.

--
Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to find
them.

On Sat, Aug 22, 2020, 20:39 Davyd McColl  wrote:


I know I'm quite new, but I'm happy to push approved packages. My
Microsoft
account for nuget is this email address (dav...@gmail.com)

-d


On August 22, 2020 19:46:45 Dominik Psenner  wrote:

> Hi
>
> I recall that we were forced to transform the nuget account
Apache.Logging (
> https://www.nuget.org/profiles/Apache.Logging) from a personal account
into
> an organization. I am currently the only member and administrator of that
> organization. Please share with me (may also be in private) the nuget
> account (most probably the email of your microsoft account) if you want
me
> to add you to the organization. Any member of the pmc may also become
> administrator of that group if he wishes to.
>
> While I try to process your requests as fast as possible, please give me
> some days. I am at the beach with the family and tend to swim and dive in
> moments when I do not build sandcastles with the kids. ;-)
>
> Best regards
> Dominik
> --
> Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to find
> them.
>
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020, 02:01 Ralph Goers 
wrote:
>
>> And, FWIW, Nuget won’t let me register with my apache.org <
>> http://apache.org/> email address saying it can’t be a work or school
>> email.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> > On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:46 PM, Ralph Goers 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > This gets better and better. I was able to decrypt the file but the
>> credentials don’t work.  The Nuget.org  site says
>> “NuGet.org  password login in no longer supported.
>> Please use a Microsoft account to sign into NuGet gallery.”
>> >
>> > Ralph
>> >
>> >> On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:37 PM, Ralph Goers 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Going back through my old emails I see Dominik had the same problem
in
>> 2016. I forgot to update my files and now I see the instructions have
>> changed.
>> >>
>> >> Ralph
>> >>
>> >>> On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:27 PM, Ralph Goers <
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I figured out that the document is now at home.apache.org <
>> http://home.apache.org/>. Unfortunately, that didn’t do me any good.
gpg
>> -d is failing with “No secret key”. That doesn’t seem too surprising
since
>> my key wasn’t used to sign the document.
>> >>>
>> >>> Ralph
>> >>>
>>  On Aug 21, 2020, at 3:53 PM, Ralph Goers <
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>  Dominik,
>> 
>>  The README file says that the keys can be found at
>> https://people.apache.org/keys/group/logging-pmc.asc <
>> https://people.apache.org/keys/group/logging-pmc.asc>.  That url
returns
>> a 404. Any idea where it moved to?
>> 
>>  Ralph
>> 
>> > On Aug 17, 2020, at 9:39 AM, Dominik Psenner 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I guess that would be a nuget publish.
>> >
>> >
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/publish-a-package
>> >
>> > The credentials to that account are stored in the private repos of
>> logging
>> > pmc. Most members of the pmc should be in the set of recipients
with
>> their
>> > gpg key.
>> > --
>> > Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to
>> find
>> > them.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 08:56 Davyd McColl 
wrote:
>> >
>> >> Great!
>> >>
>> >> How do we get the nupkg to nuget.org? This is the final step
that
>> most
>> >> users are going to be interested in.
>> >>
>> >> Having a look at what's at the url you posted, I have ideas on
how
>> to
>> >> streamline future releases, so the next time I'm in that area,
I'm
>> >> definitely implementing those ideas. I don't see changes to the
>> Release
>> >> Notes area -- if I were to try to streamline that into a release,
>> would a
>> >> CHANGELOG file be useful? Or is there a better way?
>> >>
>> >> -d
>> >> On 2020/08/16 23:26:07, Matt Sicker  wrote:
>> >> I committed them to dist already. I don't know how long we should
>> wait
>> >> for any mirroring to catch up, though on my end, I see updated
>> >> artifacts on https://downloads.apache.org/logging/log4net/ other
>> than
>> >> the release notes.
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 15:09, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> +1 to that!
>> >>>
>> >>> Let me know when these are published. I can update the web site
to
>> >> reflect that it is no longer dormant.
>> >>>
>> >>> Ralph
>> >>>
>>  On Aug 16, 2020, at 11:54 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>> 
>>  Thanks so much for your help in releasing this!
>> 
>>  On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 13:53, Davyd McColl wrote:
>> >
>> > I'll make changes to the automated build to 

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4Net 2.0.9

[Dominik Psenner]

Apparently it cant be the email but must be the nuget accounts username,
apologies.

--
Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to find
them.

On Sat, Aug 22, 2020, 20:39 Davyd McColl  wrote:

> I know I'm quite new, but I'm happy to push approved packages. My
> Microsoft
> account for nuget is this email address (dav...@gmail.com)
>
> -d
>
>
> On August 22, 2020 19:46:45 Dominik Psenner  wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > I recall that we were forced to transform the nuget account
> Apache.Logging (
> > https://www.nuget.org/profiles/Apache.Logging) from a personal account
> into
> > an organization. I am currently the only member and administrator of that
> > organization. Please share with me (may also be in private) the nuget
> > account (most probably the email of your microsoft account) if you want
> me
> > to add you to the organization. Any member of the pmc may also become
> > administrator of that group if he wishes to.
> >
> > While I try to process your requests as fast as possible, please give me
> > some days. I am at the beach with the family and tend to swim and dive in
> > moments when I do not build sandcastles with the kids. ;-)
> >
> > Best regards
> > Dominik
> > --
> > Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to find
> > them.
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020, 02:01 Ralph Goers 
> wrote:
> >
> >> And, FWIW, Nuget won’t let me register with my apache.org <
> >> http://apache.org/> email address saying it can’t be a work or school
> >> email.
> >>
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >> > On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:46 PM, Ralph Goers 
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This gets better and better. I was able to decrypt the file but the
> >> credentials don’t work.  The Nuget.org  site says
> >> “NuGet.org  password login in no longer supported.
> >> Please use a Microsoft account to sign into NuGet gallery.”
> >> >
> >> > Ralph
> >> >
> >> >> On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:37 PM, Ralph Goers  >
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Going back through my old emails I see Dominik had the same problem
> in
> >> 2016. I forgot to update my files and now I see the instructions have
> >> changed.
> >> >>
> >> >> Ralph
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:27 PM, Ralph Goers <
> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I figured out that the document is now at home.apache.org <
> >> http://home.apache.org/>. Unfortunately, that didn’t do me any good.
> gpg
> >> -d is failing with “No secret key”. That doesn’t seem too surprising
> since
> >> my key wasn’t used to sign the document.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Ralph
> >> >>>
> >>  On Aug 21, 2020, at 3:53 PM, Ralph Goers <
> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >>  Dominik,
> >> 
> >>  The README file says that the keys can be found at
> >> https://people.apache.org/keys/group/logging-pmc.asc <
> >> https://people.apache.org/keys/group/logging-pmc.asc>.  That url
> returns
> >> a 404. Any idea where it moved to?
> >> 
> >>  Ralph
> >> 
> >> > On Aug 17, 2020, at 9:39 AM, Dominik Psenner 
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I guess that would be a nuget publish.
> >> >
> >> >
> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/publish-a-package
> >> >
> >> > The credentials to that account are stored in the private repos of
> >> logging
> >> > pmc. Most members of the pmc should be in the set of recipients
> with
> >> their
> >> > gpg key.
> >> > --
> >> > Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to
> >> find
> >> > them.
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 08:56 Davyd McColl 
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Great!
> >> >>
> >> >> How do we get the nupkg to nuget.org? This is the final step
> that
> >> most
> >> >> users are going to be interested in.
> >> >>
> >> >> Having a look at what's at the url you posted, I have ideas on
> how
> >> to
> >> >> streamline future releases, so the next time I'm in that area,
> I'm
> >> >> definitely implementing those ideas. I don't see changes to the
> >> Release
> >> >> Notes area -- if I were to try to streamline that into a release,
> >> would a
> >> >> CHANGELOG file be useful? Or is there a better way?
> >> >>
> >> >> -d
> >> >> On 2020/08/16 23:26:07, Matt Sicker  wrote:
> >> >> I committed them to dist already. I don't know how long we should
> >> wait
> >> >> for any mirroring to catch up, though on my end, I see updated
> >> >> artifacts on https://downloads.apache.org/logging/log4net/ other
> >> than
> >> >> the release notes.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 15:09, Ralph Goers wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> +1 to that!
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Let me know when these are published. I can update the web site
> to
> >> >> reflect that it is no longer dormant.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Ralph
> >> >>>
> >>  On Aug 16, 2020, at 11:54 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> >> 
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4Net 2.0.9

[Davyd McColl]

I know I'm quite new, but I'm happy to push approved packages. My Microsoft 
account for nuget is this email address (dav...@gmail.com)


-d


On August 22, 2020 19:46:45 Dominik Psenner  wrote:


Hi

I recall that we were forced to transform the nuget account Apache.Logging (
https://www.nuget.org/profiles/Apache.Logging) from a personal account into
an organization. I am currently the only member and administrator of that
organization. Please share with me (may also be in private) the nuget
account (most probably the email of your microsoft account) if you want me
to add you to the organization. Any member of the pmc may also become
administrator of that group if he wishes to.

While I try to process your requests as fast as possible, please give me
some days. I am at the beach with the family and tend to swim and dive in
moments when I do not build sandcastles with the kids. ;-)

Best regards
Dominik
--
Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to find
them.

On Sat, Aug 22, 2020, 02:01 Ralph Goers  wrote:


And, FWIW, Nuget won’t let me register with my apache.org <
http://apache.org/> email address saying it can’t be a work or school
email.

Ralph

> On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:46 PM, Ralph Goers 
wrote:
>
> This gets better and better. I was able to decrypt the file but the
credentials don’t work.  The Nuget.org  site says
“NuGet.org  password login in no longer supported.
Please use a Microsoft account to sign into NuGet gallery.”
>
> Ralph
>
>> On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:37 PM, Ralph Goers 
wrote:
>>
>> Going back through my old emails I see Dominik had the same problem in
2016. I forgot to update my files and now I see the instructions have
changed.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>>> On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:27 PM, Ralph Goers 
wrote:
>>>
>>> I figured out that the document is now at home.apache.org <
http://home.apache.org/>. Unfortunately, that didn’t do me any good. gpg
-d is failing with “No secret key”. That doesn’t seem too surprising since
my key wasn’t used to sign the document.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
 On Aug 21, 2020, at 3:53 PM, Ralph Goers 
wrote:

 Dominik,

 The README file says that the keys can be found at
https://people.apache.org/keys/group/logging-pmc.asc <
https://people.apache.org/keys/group/logging-pmc.asc>.  That url returns
a 404. Any idea where it moved to?

 Ralph

> On Aug 17, 2020, at 9:39 AM, Dominik Psenner 
wrote:
>
> I guess that would be a nuget publish.
>
> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/publish-a-package
>
> The credentials to that account are stored in the private repos of
logging
> pmc. Most members of the pmc should be in the set of recipients with
their
> gpg key.
> --
> Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to
find
> them.
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 08:56 Davyd McColl  wrote:
>
>> Great!
>>
>> How do we get the nupkg to nuget.org? This is the final step that
most
>> users are going to be interested in.
>>
>> Having a look at what's at the url you posted, I have ideas on how
to
>> streamline future releases, so the next time I'm in that area, I'm
>> definitely implementing those ideas. I don't see changes to the
Release
>> Notes area -- if I were to try to streamline that into a release,
would a
>> CHANGELOG file be useful? Or is there a better way?
>>
>> -d
>> On 2020/08/16 23:26:07, Matt Sicker  wrote:
>> I committed them to dist already. I don't know how long we should
wait
>> for any mirroring to catch up, though on my end, I see updated
>> artifacts on https://downloads.apache.org/logging/log4net/ other
than
>> the release notes.
>>
>> On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 15:09, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 to that!
>>>
>>> Let me know when these are published. I can update the web site to
>> reflect that it is no longer dormant.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
 On Aug 16, 2020, at 11:54 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:

 Thanks so much for your help in releasing this!

 On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 13:53, Davyd McColl wrote:
>
> I'll make changes to the automated build to affect all changes
you
>> have
> made (and perhaps will make) automatically to future releases
for the
>> next
> release. Apologies for making this more difficult than it needs
to be
>> (:
>
> -d
>
>
> On August 16, 2020 20:37:01 Matt Sicker wrote:
>
>> Just a simple copy of the LICENSE and NOTICE file into the
binaries
>> zip, and a rename of the files to include "apache" in the name.
I've
>> uploaded them to dist along with updating the KEYS file for
log4net,
>> though that should probably be merged together with the
project-wide
>> KEYS file in the parent directory. There's an outdated

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4Net 2.0.9

[Dominik Psenner]

Hi

I recall that we were forced to transform the nuget account Apache.Logging (
https://www.nuget.org/profiles/Apache.Logging) from a personal account into
an organization. I am currently the only member and administrator of that
organization. Please share with me (may also be in private) the nuget
account (most probably the email of your microsoft account) if you want me
to add you to the organization. Any member of the pmc may also become
administrator of that group if he wishes to.

While I try to process your requests as fast as possible, please give me
some days. I am at the beach with the family and tend to swim and dive in
moments when I do not build sandcastles with the kids. ;-)

Best regards
Dominik
--
Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to find
them.

On Sat, Aug 22, 2020, 02:01 Ralph Goers  wrote:

> And, FWIW, Nuget won’t let me register with my apache.org <
> http://apache.org/> email address saying it can’t be a work or school
> email.
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:46 PM, Ralph Goers 
> wrote:
> >
> > This gets better and better. I was able to decrypt the file but the
> credentials don’t work.  The Nuget.org  site says
> “NuGet.org  password login in no longer supported.
> Please use a Microsoft account to sign into NuGet gallery.”
> >
> > Ralph
> >
> >> On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:37 PM, Ralph Goers 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Going back through my old emails I see Dominik had the same problem in
> 2016. I forgot to update my files and now I see the instructions have
> changed.
> >>
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >>> On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:27 PM, Ralph Goers 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I figured out that the document is now at home.apache.org <
> http://home.apache.org/>. Unfortunately, that didn’t do me any good. gpg
> -d is failing with “No secret key”. That doesn’t seem too surprising since
> my key wasn’t used to sign the document.
> >>>
> >>> Ralph
> >>>
>  On Aug 21, 2020, at 3:53 PM, Ralph Goers 
> wrote:
> 
>  Dominik,
> 
>  The README file says that the keys can be found at
> https://people.apache.org/keys/group/logging-pmc.asc <
> https://people.apache.org/keys/group/logging-pmc.asc>.  That url returns
> a 404. Any idea where it moved to?
> 
>  Ralph
> 
> > On Aug 17, 2020, at 9:39 AM, Dominik Psenner 
> wrote:
> >
> > I guess that would be a nuget publish.
> >
> > https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/publish-a-package
> >
> > The credentials to that account are stored in the private repos of
> logging
> > pmc. Most members of the pmc should be in the set of recipients with
> their
> > gpg key.
> > --
> > Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to
> find
> > them.
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 08:56 Davyd McColl  wrote:
> >
> >> Great!
> >>
> >> How do we get the nupkg to nuget.org? This is the final step that
> most
> >> users are going to be interested in.
> >>
> >> Having a look at what's at the url you posted, I have ideas on how
> to
> >> streamline future releases, so the next time I'm in that area, I'm
> >> definitely implementing those ideas. I don't see changes to the
> Release
> >> Notes area -- if I were to try to streamline that into a release,
> would a
> >> CHANGELOG file be useful? Or is there a better way?
> >>
> >> -d
> >> On 2020/08/16 23:26:07, Matt Sicker  wrote:
> >> I committed them to dist already. I don't know how long we should
> wait
> >> for any mirroring to catch up, though on my end, I see updated
> >> artifacts on https://downloads.apache.org/logging/log4net/ other
> than
> >> the release notes.
> >>
> >> On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 15:09, Ralph Goers wrote:
> >>>
> >>> +1 to that!
> >>>
> >>> Let me know when these are published. I can update the web site to
> >> reflect that it is no longer dormant.
> >>>
> >>> Ralph
> >>>
>  On Aug 16, 2020, at 11:54 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> 
>  Thanks so much for your help in releasing this!
> 
>  On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 13:53, Davyd McColl wrote:
> >
> > I'll make changes to the automated build to affect all changes
> you
> >> have
> > made (and perhaps will make) automatically to future releases
> for the
> >> next
> > release. Apologies for making this more difficult than it needs
> to be
> >> (:
> >
> > -d
> >
> >
> > On August 16, 2020 20:37:01 Matt Sicker wrote:
> >
> >> Just a simple copy of the LICENSE and NOTICE file into the
> binaries
> >> zip, and a rename of the files to include "apache" in the name.
> I've
> >> uploaded them to dist along with updating the KEYS file for
> log4net,
> >> though that should probably be merged together with the
> project-wide
> >> KEYS 

Log4cxx version

[Ralph Goers]

In looking at the log4cxx changelog I can’t help notice that the first release 
was 17 years ago. After all these years one would expect that the version 
should have hit 1.0.0 at least 10-15 years ago. Isn’t it time to correct that?

Ralph

Re: [VOTE] [log4xx] Release log4cxx 0.11.0

[Ralph Goers]

Wow. I just noticed that it was 12 years since the last release. A little 
overdue I think.  Great going guys. Keep up the good work!

Ralph

> On Aug 22, 2020, at 10:07 AM, Ralph Goers  wrote:
> 
> Please disregard the last sentence below. The site must have been cached. It 
> shows 0.11.0 now.
> 
> Ralph
> 
>> On Aug 22, 2020, at 10:04 AM, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>> 
>> I didn’t try to run the build from master. I checked out the release tag. 
>> The normal process with the maven release plugin is to update the version to 
>> the release version on master, create a tag, and then update the version to 
>> the next development version.  The release build is then performed by 
>> checking out the tag. I expected to see the log4cxx release version in the 
>> pom on the release tag and it wasn’t there. Once a release tag is created no 
>> modifications can be made so everything needs to be correct. In Log4j I only 
>> create a release branch from the tag if a patch to that release is required. 
>> To date, we have never done that.
>> 
>> As far as deploying the site goes, we deploy to a version such as 0.11.0 and 
>> then change the symlink for the current site to point to the release 
>> directory. As I understand it, that is what you did. However, when I open 
>> https://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/latest_stable/download.html 
>>  and the 
>> changelog page in my browser I am still seeing the site for 0.10.0.
>> 
>> Ralph
>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2020, at 1:34 AM, Thorsten Schöning >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Guten Tag Ralph Goers,
>>> am Freitag, 21. August 2020 um 23:42 schrieben Sie:
>>> 
 At this point I am not sure how to update the site.
>>> 
>>> TL;DR:
>>> 
>>> The site describing the latest release is not supposed to be updated
>>> from MASTER. Sources need to be merged to "latest_stable", revision
>>> numbers, release dates in e.g. "changes.xml" updated in that branch
>>> and then "mvn site-deploy" used in that branch. Afterwards links
>>> available in the SVN for sites need to be customized.
>>> 
>>> I did that just now: https://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/latest_stable/ 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Some more details:
>>> 
>>> The original release-process using MVN and the afterwards created
>>> scripts should have resulted in new branches and tags created to vote
>>> on. After that vote is accepted, the released source should be merged
>>> into the branch "latest_stable" and that branch would be the one to
>>> generate the updated site from.
>>> 
>>> Using MVN to create the release, which was the approach of the past,
>>> should have handled changing version numbers everywhere according its
>>> own concepts. That leads to a new version number because of a new
>>> development cycle in MASTER and is the reason why MASTER will never be
>>> the correct place to update the released site. After the release, the
>>> version number in MASTER will always be ahead of the release.
>>> 
>>> Generating a site triggers some ANT-logic to either update existing
>>> folders or create new ones in SVN based on the current version number
>>> of the project in "pom.xml". That reduces things like
>>> "0.11.0-SNAPSHOT" to "0.11.0" only and can therefore work for releases
>>> and MASTER the same time. It's only important to exec that from the
>>> correct branch to get the correct version number.
>>> 
>>> That's the reason why "latest_stable" needs to be used to publish:
>>> That contains e.g. "0.11.0" after a release why MASTER contains
>>> "0.12.0-SNAPSHOT" or alike already. So generating the site with MASTER
>>> vs. "latest_stable" results in different sites available in SVN.
>>> 
>>> To make handling those different directories easier, I created two
>>> links "latest_stable" and "next_stable" in the past simply targeting
>>> the corresponding directory. So after a release and after new sites
>>> have been generated, those links needs to be changed to their new
>>> targets. We currently have the following:
>>> 
 0.10.0
 0.11.0
 latest_stable -> 0.10.0
 next_stable   -> 0.11.0
>>> 
>>> Which I changed to the following now:
>>> 
 0.10.0
 0.11.0
 0.12.0
 old_stable-> 0.10.0
 latest_stable -> 0.11.0
 next_stable   -> 0.12.0
>>> 
>>> While this all might sound a bit difficult, reason simply is that I
>>> tried to reuse as much as possible of the formerly available
>>> release-process and only automate those things that needed to be done
>>> manually in the past.
>>> 
>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>>> 
>>> Thorsten Schöning
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Thorsten Schöning   E-Mail: thorsten.schoen...@am-soft.de 
>>> 
>>> AM-SoFT IT-Systeme  http://www.AM-SoFT.de/ 
>>> 
>>> Telefon...05151-  9468- 55
>>> Fax...05151-  9468- 88
>>> Mobil..0178-8 9468- 04
>>> 
>>> AM-SoFT GmbH 

Re: [VOTE] [log4xx] Release log4cxx 0.11.0

[Ralph Goers]

Please disregard the last sentence below. The site must have been cached. It 
shows 0.11.0 now.

Ralph

> On Aug 22, 2020, at 10:04 AM, Ralph Goers  wrote:
> 
> I didn’t try to run the build from master. I checked out the release tag. The 
> normal process with the maven release plugin is to update the version to the 
> release version on master, create a tag, and then update the version to the 
> next development version.  The release build is then performed by checking 
> out the tag. I expected to see the log4cxx release version in the pom on the 
> release tag and it wasn’t there. Once a release tag is created no 
> modifications can be made so everything needs to be correct. In Log4j I only 
> create a release branch from the tag if a patch to that release is required. 
> To date, we have never done that.
> 
> As far as deploying the site goes, we deploy to a version such as 0.11.0 and 
> then change the symlink for the current site to point to the release 
> directory. As I understand it, that is what you did. However, when I open 
> https://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/latest_stable/download.html 
>  and the 
> changelog page in my browser I am still seeing the site for 0.10.0.
> 
> Ralph
> 
>> On Aug 22, 2020, at 1:34 AM, Thorsten Schöning > > wrote:
>> 
>> Guten Tag Ralph Goers,
>> am Freitag, 21. August 2020 um 23:42 schrieben Sie:
>> 
>>> At this point I am not sure how to update the site.
>> 
>> TL;DR:
>> 
>> The site describing the latest release is not supposed to be updated
>> from MASTER. Sources need to be merged to "latest_stable", revision
>> numbers, release dates in e.g. "changes.xml" updated in that branch
>> and then "mvn site-deploy" used in that branch. Afterwards links
>> available in the SVN for sites need to be customized.
>> 
>> I did that just now: https://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/latest_stable/ 
>> 
>> 
>> Some more details:
>> 
>> The original release-process using MVN and the afterwards created
>> scripts should have resulted in new branches and tags created to vote
>> on. After that vote is accepted, the released source should be merged
>> into the branch "latest_stable" and that branch would be the one to
>> generate the updated site from.
>> 
>> Using MVN to create the release, which was the approach of the past,
>> should have handled changing version numbers everywhere according its
>> own concepts. That leads to a new version number because of a new
>> development cycle in MASTER and is the reason why MASTER will never be
>> the correct place to update the released site. After the release, the
>> version number in MASTER will always be ahead of the release.
>> 
>> Generating a site triggers some ANT-logic to either update existing
>> folders or create new ones in SVN based on the current version number
>> of the project in "pom.xml". That reduces things like
>> "0.11.0-SNAPSHOT" to "0.11.0" only and can therefore work for releases
>> and MASTER the same time. It's only important to exec that from the
>> correct branch to get the correct version number.
>> 
>> That's the reason why "latest_stable" needs to be used to publish:
>> That contains e.g. "0.11.0" after a release why MASTER contains
>> "0.12.0-SNAPSHOT" or alike already. So generating the site with MASTER
>> vs. "latest_stable" results in different sites available in SVN.
>> 
>> To make handling those different directories easier, I created two
>> links "latest_stable" and "next_stable" in the past simply targeting
>> the corresponding directory. So after a release and after new sites
>> have been generated, those links needs to be changed to their new
>> targets. We currently have the following:
>> 
>>> 0.10.0
>>> 0.11.0
>>> latest_stable -> 0.10.0
>>> next_stable   -> 0.11.0
>> 
>> Which I changed to the following now:
>> 
>>> 0.10.0
>>> 0.11.0
>>> 0.12.0
>>> old_stable-> 0.10.0
>>> latest_stable -> 0.11.0
>>> next_stable   -> 0.12.0
>> 
>> While this all might sound a bit difficult, reason simply is that I
>> tried to reuse as much as possible of the formerly available
>> release-process and only automate those things that needed to be done
>> manually in the past.
>> 
>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>> 
>> Thorsten Schöning
>> 
>> -- 
>> Thorsten Schöning   E-Mail: thorsten.schoen...@am-soft.de 
>> 
>> AM-SoFT IT-Systeme  http://www.AM-SoFT.de/ 
>> 
>> Telefon...05151-  9468- 55
>> Fax...05151-  9468- 88
>> Mobil..0178-8 9468- 04
>> 
>> AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
>> AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [VOTE] [log4xx] Release log4cxx 0.11.0

[Ralph Goers]

I didn’t try to run the build from master. I checked out the release tag. The 
normal process with the maven release plugin is to update the version to the 
release version on master, create a tag, and then update the version to the 
next development version.  The release build is then performed by checking out 
the tag. I expected to see the log4cxx release version in the pom on the 
release tag and it wasn’t there. Once a release tag is created no modifications 
can be made so everything needs to be correct. In Log4j I only create a release 
branch from the tag if a patch to that release is required. To date, we have 
never done that.

As far as deploying the site goes, we deploy to a version such as 0.11.0 and 
then change the symlink for the current site to point to the release directory. 
As I understand it, that is what you did. However, when I open 
https://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/latest_stable/download.html 
 and the 
changelog page in my browser I am still seeing the site for 0.10.0.

Ralph

> On Aug 22, 2020, at 1:34 AM, Thorsten Schöning  wrote:
> 
> Guten Tag Ralph Goers,
> am Freitag, 21. August 2020 um 23:42 schrieben Sie:
> 
>> At this point I am not sure how to update the site.
> 
> TL;DR:
> 
> The site describing the latest release is not supposed to be updated
> from MASTER. Sources need to be merged to "latest_stable", revision
> numbers, release dates in e.g. "changes.xml" updated in that branch
> and then "mvn site-deploy" used in that branch. Afterwards links
> available in the SVN for sites need to be customized.
> 
> I did that just now: https://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/latest_stable/
> 
> Some more details:
> 
> The original release-process using MVN and the afterwards created
> scripts should have resulted in new branches and tags created to vote
> on. After that vote is accepted, the released source should be merged
> into the branch "latest_stable" and that branch would be the one to
> generate the updated site from.
> 
> Using MVN to create the release, which was the approach of the past,
> should have handled changing version numbers everywhere according its
> own concepts. That leads to a new version number because of a new
> development cycle in MASTER and is the reason why MASTER will never be
> the correct place to update the released site. After the release, the
> version number in MASTER will always be ahead of the release.
> 
> Generating a site triggers some ANT-logic to either update existing
> folders or create new ones in SVN based on the current version number
> of the project in "pom.xml". That reduces things like
> "0.11.0-SNAPSHOT" to "0.11.0" only and can therefore work for releases
> and MASTER the same time. It's only important to exec that from the
> correct branch to get the correct version number.
> 
> That's the reason why "latest_stable" needs to be used to publish:
> That contains e.g. "0.11.0" after a release why MASTER contains
> "0.12.0-SNAPSHOT" or alike already. So generating the site with MASTER
> vs. "latest_stable" results in different sites available in SVN.
> 
> To make handling those different directories easier, I created two
> links "latest_stable" and "next_stable" in the past simply targeting
> the corresponding directory. So after a release and after new sites
> have been generated, those links needs to be changed to their new
> targets. We currently have the following:
> 
>> 0.10.0
>> 0.11.0
>> latest_stable -> 0.10.0
>> next_stable   -> 0.11.0
> 
> Which I changed to the following now:
> 
>> 0.10.0
>> 0.11.0
>> 0.12.0
>> old_stable-> 0.10.0
>> latest_stable -> 0.11.0
>> next_stable   -> 0.12.0
> 
> While this all might sound a bit difficult, reason simply is that I
> tried to reuse as much as possible of the formerly available
> release-process and only automate those things that needed to be done
> manually in the past.
> 
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
> 
> Thorsten Schöning
> 
> -- 
> Thorsten Schöning   E-Mail: thorsten.schoen...@am-soft.de
> AM-SoFT IT-Systeme  http://www.AM-SoFT.de/
> 
> Telefon...05151-  9468- 55
> Fax...05151-  9468- 88
> Mobil..0178-8 9468- 04
> 
> AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
> AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
> 
> 

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Release Logging Parent POM version 3

[Matt Sicker]

Hearing no objections, I'll continue with this release.

On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 13:53, Matt Sicker  wrote:
>
> It's been over two years since the last parent POM release. In that
> time, its own parent POM has been upgraded from version 19 to version
> 23. We don't really have any other explicit changes here, though the
> build pipeline from last time has since been moved to our unified
> logging-pipelines git repository.
>
> This is a vote using lazy consensus to release version 3 of Logging
> Parent POM. After 72 hours, if there are no objections, we will
> release this parent pom. Please leave your votes if you wish.
>
> Staging repository:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachelogging-1060/
>
> Git repository:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-parent.git
>
> Tag:
>
> logging-parent-3
>
> Signed using key fingerprint = 748F 15B2 CF9B A8F0 2415  5E6E D7C9
> 2B70 FA1C 814D as provided in the Logging Services PMC KEYS file:
>
> https://downloads.apache.org/logging/KEYS
>
> You can import the project KEYS file for verifying releases using the command:
>
> gpg --import <(curl https://downloads.apache.org/logging/KEYS)
>
> The key can also be imported from public GPG keyservers using the command:
>
> gpg --recv-keys 748F15B2CF9BA8F024155E6ED7C92B70FA1C814D
>
> --
> Matt Sicker 



-- 
Matt Sicker 

Re: [VOTE] [log4xx] Release log4cxx 0.11.0

[Thorsten Schöning]

Guten Tag Ralph Goers,
am Freitag, 21. August 2020 um 23:42 schrieben Sie:

> At this point I am not sure how to update the site.

TL;DR:

The site describing the latest release is not supposed to be updated
from MASTER. Sources need to be merged to "latest_stable", revision
numbers, release dates in e.g. "changes.xml" updated in that branch
and then "mvn site-deploy" used in that branch. Afterwards links
available in the SVN for sites need to be customized.

I did that just now: https://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/latest_stable/

Some more details:

The original release-process using MVN and the afterwards created
scripts should have resulted in new branches and tags created to vote
on. After that vote is accepted, the released source should be merged
into the branch "latest_stable" and that branch would be the one to
generate the updated site from.

Using MVN to create the release, which was the approach of the past,
should have handled changing version numbers everywhere according its
own concepts. That leads to a new version number because of a new
development cycle in MASTER and is the reason why MASTER will never be
the correct place to update the released site. After the release, the
version number in MASTER will always be ahead of the release.

Generating a site triggers some ANT-logic to either update existing
folders or create new ones in SVN based on the current version number
of the project in "pom.xml". That reduces things like
"0.11.0-SNAPSHOT" to "0.11.0" only and can therefore work for releases
and MASTER the same time. It's only important to exec that from the
correct branch to get the correct version number.

That's the reason why "latest_stable" needs to be used to publish:
That contains e.g. "0.11.0" after a release why MASTER contains
"0.12.0-SNAPSHOT" or alike already. So generating the site with MASTER
vs. "latest_stable" results in different sites available in SVN.

To make handling those different directories easier, I created two
links "latest_stable" and "next_stable" in the past simply targeting
the corresponding directory. So after a release and after new sites
have been generated, those links needs to be changed to their new
targets. We currently have the following:

> 0.10.0
> 0.11.0
> latest_stable -> 0.10.0
> next_stable   -> 0.11.0

Which I changed to the following now:

> 0.10.0
> 0.11.0
> 0.12.0
> old_stable-> 0.10.0
> latest_stable -> 0.11.0
> next_stable   -> 0.12.0

While this all might sound a bit difficult, reason simply is that I
tried to reuse as much as possible of the formerly available
release-process and only automate those things that needed to be done
manually in the past.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Thorsten Schöning

-- 
Thorsten Schöning   E-Mail: thorsten.schoen...@am-soft.de
AM-SoFT IT-Systeme  http://www.AM-SoFT.de/

Telefon...05151-  9468- 55
Fax...05151-  9468- 88
Mobil..0178-8 9468- 04

AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln
AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow