I think you should just push your patches, we can always revert them if that cause any problem ;-)
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 14:08, Tim Moloney <[email protected]> wrote: > The fix for PAXLOGING-53 addressed a problem where framework log > events were getting duplicated. While the fix did address the > problem, it also prevented log events from non-OSGi APIs from having > those log events sent to the OSGi LogListeners. Since PAXLOGGING-53 > never mentioned changing what events were sent to the LogListeners, I > assume this was an unintended side-effect. > > I created PAXLOGGING-98 to raise this issue and attached two patches > (one for 1.6.x and one for 1.5.x). Then I started reading on how > OPS4J worked and started following the process to fix PAXLOGGING-98. > I have forked ops4j master and applied the 1.6.x patch to my > repository which changes PaxLoggingImpl.java and > PaxLoggingServiceImpl.java. The changes to PaxLoggerImpl.java revert > the fix for PAXLOGGING-53. The changes to PaxLoggingServiceImpl.java > fix PAXLOGGING-53 while still allowing non-OSGi log event to be sent > to LogListeners (PAXLOGGING-98). > > If there is approval, I'd like to push my changes back to ops4j master. > Thanks. > > > -- > Tim Moloney > ManTech Real-time Systems Laboratory > 2015 Cattlemen Road \ / > Sarasota, FL 34232 .________\(O)/________. > (941) 377-6775 x208 ' ' O(.)O ' ' > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
