I second Achim here. A jira issue (and maybe a patch/pull request) would be great!
Kind regards, Andreas On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com>wrote: > Hi Arnaud, > > it's probably best to remove the version since in tomcat it's dependent to > the actual tomcat version and this would require a new pax-logging version > for every "upgrade". > could you open a jira issue for this? > > regards, Achim > > > 2012/12/12 Arnaud MERGEY <a_mer...@yahoo.fr> > >> Hello, >> >> Currently pax-logging export JULI, in version 1.0, but as JULI is a >> tomcat component, JULI follows tomcat versioning (6.0.X or 7.0.X for >> example). >> >> For example tomcat-jdbc component (the new connection pool implementation >> replacing dbcp) requires org.apache.juli.logging [6.0.18,7.0.0) >> so pax-logging cannot be used as JULI provider because it exports JULI >> in 1.0 version. >> >> As I guess 1.0 is not a valid version for JULI, pax-logging should >> probably export the true version, or no version at all instead. >> What do you think about it ? >> >> Best regards, >> Arnaud >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> general mailing list >> general@lists.ops4j.org >> http://lists.ops4j.org/**mailman/listinfo/general<http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general> >> > > > > -- > > Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC > OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & > Project Lead > OPS4J Pax for Vaadin <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> > Commiter & Project Lead > blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > general@lists.ops4j.org > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > >
_______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.ops4j.org http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
