]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 4:13 PM
To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'
Subject: [LOGGING] Request for API change (was RE: [VOTE] Logging 1.0
Release (again))
I want to revisit one of the issues noted below. A couple of weeks
before the VOTE was posted I made a request for a couple
-Original Message-
From: Steve Downey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 8:07 PM
To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'
Subject: RE: [LOGGING] Request for API change (was RE: [VOTE]
Logging 1.0 Release (again))
I'd argue that this is a misuse
- Cut Here -
I vote as follows on the proposed Commons Logging 1.0 Release:
[x] +1 - I support this release and am willing to help
[ ] +0 - I support this release, but cannot assist
[ ] -0 - I don't support this release
[ ] -1 - I vote against this release (requires valid
+1
- Original Message -
From: Craig R. McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:56 PM
Subject: [VOTE] Logging 1.0 Release (again)
OK, the round of discussion last time around has triggered some
improvements in the pluggability
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
* Adding mechanisms to configure loggers through the Log interface.
No need for that - passing attributes to the factory should be enough
for most common needs.
In time we'll need to document whatever attribute names are used
for different
- Cut Here -
I vote as follows on the proposed Commons Logging 1.0 Release:
[x] +1 - I support this release and am willing to help
[ ] +0 - I support this release, but cannot assist
[ ] -0 - I don't support this release
[ ] -1 - I vote against this release (requires valid
PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [VOTE] Logging 1.0 Release (again)
OK, the round of discussion last time around has triggered some
improvements in the pluggability of the Logging API. In
particular, it is
now possible to plug your own factory class for Log instances, if you
don't
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Steve Downey wrote:
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 20:07:35 -0500
From: Steve Downey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Logging 1.0 Release (again)
-1
-Original Message-
From: Scott Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 5:11 PM
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Logging 1.0 Release (again)
- Cut Here -
I vote as follows on the proposed Commons Logging 1.0 Release:
[x] +1
- Cut Here -
I vote as follows on the proposed Commons Logging 1.0 Release:
[X] +1 - I support this release and am willing to help
[ ] +0 - I support this release, but cannot assist
[ ] -0 - I don't support this release
[ ] -1 - I vote against this release (requires valid
-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 8:27 PM
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Logging 1.0 Release (again)
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Steve Downey wrote:
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 20:07:35
11 matches
Mail list logo