as "look
Gump says the turbine build was failing, somebody fix it" - whereas
actually it was saying "heads up, log4j have just changed their API and
next time they release we'll need to change our code to build against
the new release".
Both types of warnings are useful,
Sean Legassick wrote:
No, this is a very useful service. I guess I read Jon's message
as "look Gump says the turbine build was failing, somebody fix
it" - whereas actually it was saying "heads up, log4j have just
changed their API and next time they release we'll need to
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 07:17:06AM -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
Don't just simply be a victim. If somebody changes an interface that you
depend on, seek them out and educate them on the necessity of maintaining
some level of backwards compatibility for a release or so on behalf of your
customers.
Recompile with
"-deprecation" for details.
[javac] 1 error, 1 warning
BUILD FAILED
/home/rubys/jakarta/turbine/build/build-turbine.xml:189: Compile failed, messages
should have been provided.
Total time: 1 minute 52 seconds
-
System.out);
[javac] ^
[javac] Note: 6 files use or override a deprecated API. Recompile with
"-deprecation" for details.
[javac] 1 error, 1 warning
BUILD FAILED
/home/rubys/jakarta/turbine/build/build-turbine.xml
Sean Lagassick wrote:
that's the problem with GUMP - it tests us against the bleeding
edge. Log4J has just changed in CVS, such that FileAppender can't
be used for writing out to the console anymore, and a
ConsoleAppender has been added for this purpose.
No question that this isn't
on 2/18/01 5:39 PM, "Sam Ruby" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No question that this isn't Turbine's fault.
Without gump, how long would this incompatibility gone unnoticed?
There undoubtably are other projects out there using log4j. If each binds
to a specific release and there isn't a period
Daniel Rall wrote:
Martin Poeschl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I applied the patch by explicitly listing the class (as the rest are).
ok, but the inner classes are still missing ... also for other classes ...
is this a ant bug??
on the other hand we only need
InnerClasses are included ...
unused org.apache.turbine.util classes are excluded ...
now turbine-pool.jar is smaller and working :-)
martin
Index: ./build/build-turbine-pool.xml
===
RCS file: /products/cvs/turbine/turbine/build
Jon Stevens wrote at Thu, 30 Nov 2000 03:18:00 -0800
You might be better off using another framework.
Ben, see also
http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine@list.working-dogs.com/msg02036.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/struts-user@jakarta.apache.org/msg00365.html
and
on 11/29/2000 10:34 AM, "Michaud, Ben A." [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
Being a newbie to both turbine and CVS, I am a little unsure of how to
proceed as I attempt to set up turbine. We are in the process of developing
a new system, and I have very limited time to get a page up and working
Hi.
Being a newbie to both turbine and CVS, I am a little unsure of how to
proceed as I attempt to set up turbine. We are in the process of developing
a new system, and I have very limited time to get a page up and working with
turbine before we have to abandon the whole notion of using a
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, you wrote:
Hi.
Being a newbie to both turbine and CVS, I am a little unsure of how to
proceed as I attempt to set up turbine. We are in the process of developing
a new system, and I have very limited time to get a page up and working with
turbine before we have to
13 matches
Mail list logo
