RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
James is a client of Avalon's logging mechanisms. James is an Avalon application or whatever terminology the Avalon folks want to use these days. I'm not aware of any plans to decouple James from Avalon, although there is an expressed desire to make James less coupled to any specific Avalon container. I think the desire is best seen not as to completely de-couple James but to replace some of the services which are provided by Avalon cornerstone and excalibur by ones which James can provide itself, specifically such as file repositories. In many cases this work is not abandoning Avalon so much as providing added value to James. James is unlikely to abandon Avalon Framework, unless there are revolutionary changes which James can't assimilate, nor is James likely to abandon Phoenix in the short term. What we would like to do is to future proof James against revolutionary changes in our Avalon dependancies, and control the code for services , currently provided by Avalon code, in which James Users are logging real and significant usability/functionality issues. Thats my take on this discussion anyway. d. attachment: winmail.dat -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
My mistake - Logging is a hot issue for me right now. The current logging that's used in the James version we are running is rather worthless to an ISP administrator - even to a Java developer, these multiple log files are not very informative nor consistant. When the logging issue came up here in the list, I jumped in as I wanted to be instrumental in both it's conceptual birth as well as design and deployemnt. The response I received was that , Yes, it's needed but not now. so I backed off. With this patch - which is really you adding some tracking to an area you are monitoring - I got all huffy and thought, Hey, what is this; we shouldn't be developing down this dead end.. Has the code been frozen yet or are you still making these mionor changes ? Has the release date been set so one can start thinking about the branch - or has that not been decided yet ? and finially, who are the primary 'Committers' and which of them are PMC's for James ?? Thank you, Alan Gerhard We talked about making changes to mailet logging after the release. I don't recall anything about not changing logging within James, which uses Avalon Logging Framework. Everyone seems relatively accepting of that logging mechanism within James, itself. --- Noel -- This EMail Was brought to you by WebMail A Netwin Web Based EMail Client http://netwinsite.com/webmail/tag.htm -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
these multiple log files are not very informative nor consistant. You can configure James to log all messages to a single file, if it helps. Examples have been posted to this mailing list several times before. Steve -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
yes, i recall. http://www.mail-archive.com/james-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg01629.html i am running James 2.0a3 - the latest 'stable' version. to implement the changes described i would bump up to the later version of avalon i suppose, and with a quick review of this xml config file, it appears that a lot has changed with reference to the logging. the avalon framework is great; the logging mechanism for it's components is great too; the interdependencies between avalon and james is not so great. in a sense, these logging issues really belong with avalon and not with james, so, i can configure *avalon* ... to log all messages to a single file, if it helps. Examples have been posted to this mailing list several times before. that is if i understand 'avalon' correctly in being an application server to launch other applications and to that i will and i am sure most of the issues i am facing will go away. however, has this new avalon been tested enough with james so we can call it stable, or is this really a non-issue ?? alan -Original Message- these multiple log files are not very informative nor consistant. You can configure James to log all messages to a single file, if it helps. Examples have been posted to this mailing list several times before. Steve attachment: winmail.dat -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
Alan, By all means, if you have issues with James, logging or otherwise, please contribute. The request from Danny was specifically related to mailet logging, which may require changes to how mailets do logging. He'd like to defer that discussion until after this release has been put out. James, itself, uses Avalon Logging. That not been proposed to change. By all means, if you have a list of logging issues, please write them up. Just please separate mailet logging issues from James logging issues. If you want all of the logging to go to a single file, edit the log targets in james-server.xml (aka environment.xml). With respect to the release schedule, Danny indicates that the propose release schedule should be considered as adopted. Peter indicates that he still has a section of code to check in. I'm not planning anything not related to a bug fix. In this case, I've seen some anomalous behavior that I'm trying to isolate, plus it seems to me a generally useful log entry. Do you have an issue with the content of the log entry? The Committers are listed at: http://jakarta.apache.org/james/weare.html. --- Noel -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 0:48 To: James Developers List Subject: RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging My mistake - Logging is a hot issue for me right now. The current logging that's used in the James version we are running is rather worthless to an ISP administrator - even to a Java developer, these multiple log files are not very informative nor consistant. When the logging issue came up here in the list, I jumped in as I wanted to be instrumental in both it's conceptual birth as well as design and deployemnt. The response I received was that , Yes, it's needed but not now. so I backed off. With this patch - which is really you adding some tracking to an area you are monitoring - I got all huffy and thought, Hey, what is this; we shouldn't be developing down this dead end.. Has the code been frozen yet or are you still making these minor changes ? Has the release date been set so one can start thinking about the branch - or has that not been decided yet ? and finially, who are the primary 'Committers' and which of them are PMC's for James ?? Thank you, Alan Gerhard We talked about making changes to mailet logging after the release. I don't recall anything about not changing logging within James, which uses Avalon Logging Framework. Everyone seems relatively accepting of that logging mechanism within James, itself. --- Noel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
i am running James 2.0a3 - the latest 'stable' version. I've been running James 2.1-CVS. There have been a few defects introduced (and more fixed) along the way, but generally I'm finding that it is stable. Considering the defects present in 2.0a3 and fixed in James 2.1-CVS, I'm happier with the current code. I've been running whatever version of Phoenix Paul Hammant felt best to keep in the CVS for us. During the code testing period, Peter is proposing that we try upgrading to the release version of Phoenix, et al, so that we don't have a proprietary beta release. the avalon framework is great; the logging mechanism for it's components is great too; Folks seem generally pleased with it. in a sense, these logging issues really belong with avalon and not with james, so, i can configure *avalon* ... to log all messages to a single file ... James is a client of Avalon's logging mechanisms. James is an Avalon application or whatever terminology the Avalon folks want to use these days. I'm not aware of any plans to decouple James from Avalon, although there is an expressed desire to make James less coupled to any specific Avalon container. In james-server.xml/environment.xml, I believe that your best bet is to change all of the log categories to reference the same log target. You could change your log targets to all refer to the same file, but I would worry about buffering/race conditions without prior knowledge of how they've implemented that code. --- Noel attachment: winmail.dat -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
sorry my mistake, misread your example, +0 d. -Original Message- From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 October 2002 17:14 To: James Developers List Subject: RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging Alan, By all means, if you have issues with James, logging or otherwise, please contribute. The request from Danny was specifically related to mailet logging, which may require changes to how mailets do logging. He'd like to defer that discussion until after this release has been put out. James, itself, uses Avalon Logging. That not been proposed to change. By all means, if you have a list of logging issues, please write them up. Just please separate mailet logging issues from James logging issues. If you want all of the logging to go to a single file, edit the log targets in james-server.xml (aka environment.xml). With respect to the release schedule, Danny indicates that the propose release schedule should be considered as adopted. Peter indicates that he still has a section of code to check in. I'm not planning anything not related to a bug fix. In this case, I've seen some anomalous behavior that I'm trying to isolate, plus it seems to me a generally useful log entry. Do you have an issue with the content of the log entry? The Committers are listed at: http://jakarta.apache.org/james/weare.html. --- Noel -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 0:48 To: James Developers List Subject: RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging My mistake - Logging is a hot issue for me right now. The current logging that's used in the James version we are running is rather worthless to an ISP administrator - even to a Java developer, these multiple log files are not very informative nor consistant. When the logging issue came up here in the list, I jumped in as I wanted to be instrumental in both it's conceptual birth as well as design and deployemnt. The response I received was that , Yes, it's needed but not now. so I backed off. With this patch - which is really you adding some tracking to an area you are monitoring - I got all huffy and thought, Hey, what is this; we shouldn't be developing down this dead end.. Has the code been frozen yet or are you still making these minor changes ? Has the release date been set so one can start thinking about the branch - or has that not been decided yet ? and finially, who are the primary 'Committers' and which of them are PMC's for James ?? Thank you, Alan Gerhard We talked about making changes to mailet logging after the release. I don't recall anything about not changing logging within James, which uses Avalon Logging Framework. Everyone seems relatively accepting of that logging mechanism within James, itself. --- Noel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
yes! -Original Message- From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 October 2002 18:35 To: James Developers List Subject: RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging Danny, sorry my mistake, misread your example, +0 d. Did you mean this in reply to the GenericListserv subject handling? --- Noel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
I think the Avalon components in James 2.0a3 have the required logging support. The newer mechanism is indicated by upping the version attribute in the logs element in the environment.xml file. Steve -Original Message- From: Alan Gerhard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 8:26 AM To: 'James Developers List' Subject: RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging yes, i recall. http://www.mail-archive.com/james-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg01 629.html i am running James 2.0a3 - the latest 'stable' version. to implement the changes described i would bump up to the later version of avalon i suppose, and with a quick review of this xml config file, it appears that a lot has changed with reference to the logging. the avalon framework is great; the logging mechanism for it's components is great too; the interdependencies between avalon and james is not so great. in a sense, these logging issues really belong with avalon and not with james, so, i can configure *avalon* ... to log all messages to a single file, if it helps. Examples have been posted to this mailing list several times before. that is if i understand 'avalon' correctly in being an application server to launch other applications and to that i will and i am sure most of the issues i am facing will go away. however, has this new avalon been tested enough with james so we can call it stable, or is this really a non-issue ?? alan -Original Message- these multiple log files are not very informative nor consistant. You can configure James to log all messages to a single file, if it helps. Examples have been posted to this mailing list several times before. Steve -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
Noel - Logging is needed, but I thought we were going to shelf this until after the freeze/release. -Original Message- I'm trying to track down a couple of delivery oddities. Found this to be a useful addition to the logging. It is only active when debug is disabled, because otherwise it would be redundant with the SMTP protocol session log. --- Noel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging
We talked about making changes to mailet logging after the release. I don't recall anything about not changing logging within James, which uses Avalon Logging Framework. Everyone seems relatively accepting of that logging mechanism within James, itself. --- Noel -Original Message- From: Alan Gerhard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 23:39 To: 'James Developers List' Subject: RE: [PATCH] SMTPHandler logging Noel - Logging is needed, but I thought we were going to shelf this until after the freeze/release. -Original Message- I'm trying to track down a couple of delivery oddities. Found this to be a useful addition to the logging. It is only active when debug is disabled, because otherwise it would be redundant with the SMTP protocol session log. --- Noel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
