On Sep 11, 2014, at 9:40 PM, Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> Since Jacopo did not answer, here is my proposition. Was there a question for me? I was hoping that this waste of time was finished > We could, as suggested Nicolas, add some educational comments in log4j2.xml > and add 2 commented out sections for error.log > So, you are not happy until you mess up with the log4j2 config file? :-) Apart from you, Jacques, no one complained or asked for modifications to the config file (even after you asked for feedback). Jacopo > Agreed? > > Jacques > > Le 09/09/2014 15:10, Pierre Smits a écrit : >> And for whom >> >> Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad >> >>> Op 9 sep. 2014 om 14:23 heeft Jacques Le Roux >>> <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> het volgende geschreven: >>> >>> >>> Le 09/09/2014 13:26, Nicolas Malin a écrit : >>>> Le 09/09/2014 12:41, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : >>>>> This is the main reason the trunk should be kept as clean as possible, >>>>> instead of changing stuff to fit committers' personal preferences. >>>> It's clear and good to simplify the configuration on production site. >>>> >>>> On some other projet (mostly on debian ;) ), configuration file contains >>>> few enable element but so mostly commented configurations with context >>>> explication of the reason to use it. >>>> With a good text editor (notepad no match) it's also clear and simple and >>>> help uncover some other view. >>>> >>>> No I don't use trunk for my configuration, I have my own parameters with >>>> my own method to deploy them :) >>>> >>>> Nicolas >>>> >>> That's a very interesting point Nicolas. The problem is now to know what >>> means "as clean as possible" in Jacopo's sentence above >>> >>> Jacques >>
