Who's maintaining log4r?

[Mat Schaffer]

Tom Copeland has piped up, and he is going to bring this up with the
Ruby Central guys (they pay for RubyForge -- hardware and bandwidth).

By the way, thanks Tom

Most definitely, thanks Tom. Good to know there's some support.

On a whim, I send sourceforge a support request asking for details
about their project take over policies.

All the documentation I could find was:
http://sourceforge.net/docs/D01/en/#takeover

But it just states that it's a case-by-case basis. We'll see if I
get any feedback about what they do with their terms and conditions
to allow for such control, legally.
-Mat

 

[Tom Copeland]

Hm. I hear ya. Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick on this one.
I'll chat with the RubyCentral guys (Rich/David/Chad) and see what they
think. RubyForge is owned by RubyCentral (they pay for hardware and
bandwidth) so they've got the final say on any policy decision like
this...

After discussing this with David and Rich, our policy is that if you
want to pick up an apparently abandoned project, fork it. The
alternatives are just too messy. But we're happy to host those forks!
Go for it.

Yours,

Tom

 

[pat eyler]

After discussing this with David and Rich, our policy is that if you
want to pick up an apparently abandoned project, fork it. The
alternatives are just too messy. But we're happy to host those forks!
Go for it.

Thanks for sharing your decision.

 

[Gerardo Santana Gómez Garrido]

After discussing this with David and Rich, our policy is that if you
want to pick up an apparently abandoned project, fork it. The
alternatives are just too messy. But we're happy to host those forks!
Go for it.

Amen

 

[Martin DeMello]

After discussing this with David and Rich, our policy is that if you
want to pick up an apparently abandoned project, fork it. The
alternatives are just too messy. But we're happy to host those forks!
Go for it.

Any acceptable way to point to the fork from the original project
page? Maybe via a section of the page that is clearly marked as
metacommentary from the site admins, and which can, of course, be
taken down by the original author resurfacing and asking that it be.

martin

 

[Tim Pease]

After discussing this with David and Rich, our policy is that if you
want to pick up an apparently abandoned project, fork it. The
alternatives are just too messy. But we're happy to host those forks!
Go for it.

Tom, thanks for looking into this. I'll have to ply the RubyCentral
crew with beer to convince them to make exceptions

Jeff, I guess you'll need to create a new log4r project. However,
before doing that, call up the undergrad computer science department
at Caltech and see if they have current contact info for Leon. That
might get you somewhere.

Blessings,
TwP

 

[Tom Copeland]

Any acceptable way to point to the fork from the original project
page? Maybe via a section of the page that is clearly marked as
metacommentary from the site admins, and which can, of course, be
taken down by the original author resurfacing and asking that it be.

Yup, good idea. I'd be happy to edit the description of the abandoned
project so that it points to the new project... I don't think that would
overstep any bounds. As you say, if the project admin resurfaces he can
always edit it back...

Yours,

tom

 

[Emil Marceta]

Does anyone know who's maintaining the log4r project? The website at
Sourceforge says Leon Torres, but his email's bouncing.

The reason I ask: I have recently begun looking into log4r and would
like to suggest some minor fixes to the installation instructions (for
noobs like me) and to the code base itself. Also, the unit tests for
the project (as it stands when installed as a gem) raise a whack of
errors and warnings. I'm not sure how to contribute.

Try googling for 'leon torres minimetria'; there are recent posts on
some apache ML with different Email address.

I also have few syslog outputter fixes for log4r that I applied locally.

emil

 

[jeffz_2002]

Thanks for all, folks.

My changes are proceeding apace, though I've not forked a new project
yet. I'll try finding Leon's email using the method above. Also,
another developer has also sent me some code he's worked on which I'll
be reviewing, and I'll be sending him mine when I get the tests passing
again (yet another massive change put in place) ... so there are
interested devs out there!

I'd be interested to hear what people feel are preconditions for a new
log4r. My guesses are:
1. Backwards API compatability for Log4r configs done via XML or YAML,
though some of the semantics may differ (e.g., the RootLogger may log
as well)
2. Same speed as original, or better.
3. Anything that worked before (including ROMP, email outputters, etc)
should still work - though not necessarily in the alpha release

As I mentioned way back in post #2, my current implementation will
likely break any direct calls to Logger.new( ... ) in client code. My
reason for this is, as suggested in Eric Evans's Domain Driven Design,
clients should probably not directly call constructors ... this ties
clients too closely to implementation, and in the case of Log4r makes
some of the design difficult (tight coupling, global state, singletons,
etc, all the stuff that's really hard to unit test). Like Log4J, my
implementation does support Logger.getLogger( 'name' ), though it's
written using the index operator Logger[ 'name' ].

But, this is just my stuff, and I'll be sharing this and *hopefully*
combining it with the work of the other developer -- unless his is way
better!

Thanks again,

Jeff

 

[Leon Torres]

Hey, thanks for finding me!

Ok, let's see... I actually thought no one would be using log4r, so I
sort of let it slide into being unmaintained. The whole project was
kind of an exercise to see if I could create a Log4j type thing in ruby,
but doing it the Ruby Way (TM). It turned out to be quite useful for
the small projects I did, so I released it.

That it's still being used is a complete surprise to me and even more
surprising was finding it in the debian package system!

I'm currently bogged down as a major contributor to another open source
project (Apache Open For Business), so I can't find the time to devote
to this. I also wrote Log4r while unemployed, and it constitutes quite
a number of man hours... whew what memories.

At this point, it would probably be wise for me to pass the baton on to
another competent developer who can give log4r some time and a little
love. I'll certainly help with explaining and transition.

So first, who's interested in maintaining it?

You can reach me at leon at oss dot minimetria dot com, I'll be
following this thread too.

 

[Leon Torres]

By the way, I've been out of the loop. Is there some Ruby commons that
we could potentially transfer the copyrights of Log4r to?

 

[Leon Torres]

Also, I'm all for changing Log4r as radically or conservative as
necessary. It was pretty much developed solo, without any kind of
serious world use testing or substantial feedback.

I agree that there are certain things about it that are a bit brittle
and broken, so I propose that the next point release be a complete
refactoring based on people's use experiences. It would also be
interesting to get more of the Ruby Way into it, especially where it
would make log4r a more pragmatic tool.

We can also spin off this thread into a separate forum or mailing list.
Is there a ruby place to set one up?

 

[Lyle Johnson]

At this point, it would probably be wise for me to pass the baton on to
another competent developer who can give log4r some time and a little
love. I'll certainly help with explaining and transition.

So first, who's interested in maintaining it?

I definitely don't want to get into the middle of this, but I know
that someone has recently announced a new project (logging) meant to
replace log4r since it was (to all appearances) unmaintained. See:

http://rubyforge.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=11494

You and this guy might want to coordinate on this.

 

[Ed Howland]

Also, I'm all for changing Log4r as radically or conservative as
necessary. It was pretty much developed solo, without any kind of
serious world use testing or substantial feedback.

Leon,


Thanks for getting back to everyone on this. Log4r has certainly
gotten a lot of usage. It is included in the OneClick Installer for
Windows (and IANM, InstantRails as well.) It can be used by the
MasterView project, and probably many others.

Would you be adverse to giving another developer commit rights, if you
lack the time? Jeffz_2002 who started this project seems to have some
changes to add.

Ed

 

[Florian Aßmann]

Hi Leon,

I'm currently using Log4r for my project, and it works fine at the
moment. I read EmailOutputter has a bug and since I planned to use
this feature I'll send a fix if it really does not work.

Without looking at the source, thanks for your work.

Sincerely
Florian

Am 12.03.2007 um 02:00 schrieb Ed Howland:

 

[Robert Dober]

Hm. I hear ya. Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick on this one.
I'll chat with the RubyCentral guys (Rich/David/Chad) and see what they
think. RubyForge is owned by RubyCentral (they pay for hardware and
bandwidth) so they've got the final say on any policy decision like
this...

Thanks for the comments,

Yours,

Tom

Well just in case if the quantity of opinions counts I think that
Pat's point is very valid indeed.

Cheers
Robert