Hi Bill,
Would you mind filing an issue for this:
http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/list
Thanks,
Rajeev
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:12 PM, Bill Higgins wrote:
>
> Thanks again for the explanation Rajeev. I would politely suggest
> beefing up the header comments in the log4j.prope
Thanks again for the explanation Rajeev. I would politely suggest
beefing up the header comments in the log4j.properties file and the
logging.properties, explaining to the user that they may either use
Log4J or java.util.logging as they please.
On Sep 1, 11:09 am, Rajeev Dayal wrote:
> Yes, I th
Yes, I think you've got it exactly right. If you notice any deviations from
this behavior, please post back on this thread and let us know.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Bill Higgins wrote:
>
> Thanks much for the response Rajeev. Let me see if I can repeat and
> reduce it to make sure I under
Thanks much for the response Rajeev. Let me see if I can repeat and
reduce it to make sure I understand the formula.
1) DataNucleus will use EITHER log4j OR java.util.logging. It never
uses both.
2) DataNucleus will use log4j if it detects log4j classes on the
classpath, otherwise it will use jav
+[tobyr]
Hi Bill,
We include both logging files due to the implementation of Datanucleus. If
you have log4j on your classpath (or if you have any jars which bundle the
log4j classes), then Datanucleus will use the log4j logging system. If you
don't have a configuration file for log4j, then none o
