----- Original Message -----
> Sorry, it looks like I didn't make myself clear. I honestly believe
> in standards, after all this is why I spent 10+ years working on
> them ;) I was, however, under the impression that lumberjack does
> not have a final (enough) spec. I guess I took a little to less
> attention after spring. I need to refresh that. One main reason for
> the opinion was that lumberjack was supposed to follow CEE and CEE
> currently f*cks off on exactly the same questions which we
> considered solve (the n-th time;)) end of last year.
Yeah, the CEE situation is problematic. As for Lumberjack, there is at least
one existing project that follows the current spec (libumberlog); that's not
enough to call the spec stable, but it, I think, a good enough reason to avoid
unnecessary differences.
> I still think it is useful to give the end user the ability to
> specify a different container. If he does, he (hopefully) knows what
> he's doing.
>
> Are we in agreement?
Yes, adding an option is very reasonable.
Mirek
_______________________________________________
rsyslog mailing list
http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/
What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards
