No matter what you do log4j looks really decaying. :-) That is one reason I am working on 2.0. It targets 1.5 and actually makes use of features at that JDK level.
Log4j 1.x is getting almost no attention these days. I wouldn't recommend changing the source and target levels. I can't speak to adding or removing UTF-8 as I'm not sure what that means. Ralph On Aug 15, 2011, at 3:57 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > For log4j it is: > <source>1.3</source> > <target>1.1</target> > > For companions component, receivers and extras: > <source>1.4</source> > <target>1.4</target> > <encoding>UTF-8</encoding> > > This is true for the maven pom, but not for the build.xml which uses > 1.2 and 1.1 (which is scary btw) > > For the unreleased zeroconf: > <source>1.2</source> > <target>1.1</target> > > Does it make sense to have different compiler configurations for add > ons to the original log4j? > > For sake of compatiblity, we can do the following: > > #1: use 1.4 for all, including log4j. 1.3 is really ancient > #2: use 1.5 for all, including log4j, because even 1.4 is long time dead > #3: leave log4j as it is, use the same configuration for companions > (and remove UTF-8) > #4: do #4, but include UTf-8 to log4j build > > To be honest, I am all for #2. I know, bc and such, but targeting for > 1.1 makes log4j really look decaying. I would agree to #4, if #2 does > not find friends. > > Your thoughts? > > Cheers > Christian > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
