Hi Jess, I suggest you post a tracking bug report for this so that these changes don't just get lost on the list. Sounds like you did a lot of great work that could be the basis for Log4j-2.0. Maybe you can gather up enough steam to make 2.0 a reality. And I agree. JDK1.5+ should be what 2.0 targets. There no compelling reason to support previous versions. However, ease of migration would be a big issue. If 2.0 changes in ways that make it hard for users migrate from 1.2.x to 2.0, then they just won't bother. I'd say as long as the primary APIs stay the same (Logger, Level, etc...), there's shouldn't be an issue.
Jake Jess Holle wrote: > Jess Holle wrote: >> For anyone interested this patch set makes the following changes: >> >> * Removed the synchronization bottleneck in >> Category.callAppenders() and AppenderAttachableImpl. >> * Added AppenderAttachableImpl5, a Java 5 specific alternative to >> AppenderAttachableImpl, and used CopyOnWriteArrayList to further >> reduce locking during append. Used this from Category rather >> than AppenderAttachableImpl but left AppenderAttachableImpl >> around for any for compatibility with any subclasses as >> AppenderAttachableImpl5 does not use a protected Vector field as >> subclasses would expect. >> > P.S. My previous AppenderAttachableImpl5 was susceptible to race > conditions. This one should not be -- at least not any that I decided > mattered. > > -- > Jess Holle > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
