Re: [VOTE] Requiring JDK 1.2

2002-10-18 Thread Paul Glezen
I don't really see the point of extending the support of JDK 1.1 for future versions of log4j. Log4j has been full featured and stable for a long time. Any one of log4j releases 1.3 and backwards are more than enough for most development environments constrained to run in JDK 1.1. Most customer

Re: [VOTE] Requiring JDK 1.2

2002-10-18 Thread robert burrell donkin
On Thursday, October 17, 2002, at 11:58 PM, Ceki Gülcü wrote: At 15:05 17.10.2002 -0700, you wrote: I do not know what all of the 1.2 dependent bits are, but it should be possible to abstract those components into interfaces and create version specific instances from a factory. So, for the NDC

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 12983] - setFile(String filename, boolean appender) removed from super class

2002-10-18 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: [VOTE] Requiring JDK 1.2

2002-10-18 Thread Ceki Gülcü
At 22:52 17.10.2002 +0100, you wrote: JDK 1.1 support has always been a positive feature of log4j but i can understand the arguments for switching future releases to JDK1.2. as a consideration to users who require JDK1.1 support, it would be nice to keep the 1.2 release series in cold storage.

Re: [VOTE] Requiring JDK 1.2

2002-10-18 Thread robert burrell donkin
JDK 1.1 support has always been a positive feature of log4j but i can understand the arguments for switching future releases to JDK1.2. as a consideration to users who require JDK1.1 support, it would be nice to keep the 1.2 release series in cold storage. a link to the latest log4j 1.2 release

RE: [VOTE] Requiring JDK 1.2

2002-10-18 Thread Jason Dillon
I do not know what all of the 1.2 dependent bits are, but it should be possible to abstract those components into interfaces and create version specific instances from a factory. So, for the NDC bits, you can abstract the ThreadLocal usage, and use a substitute (perhaps with a low priority bg thre

Re: Initialization Error

2002-10-18 Thread Ceki Gülcü
A java.lang.VerifyError? Looks like a case of clean-and-recompile to me... Wrong list by the way. At 14:42 17.10.2002 -0700, you wrote: I've been experimenting with log4j (1.2.6) in a web application (for logging user errors not logged by the server); I've gotten the basic logging system to wo

Initialization Error

2002-10-18 Thread David Rickard
I've been experimenting with log4j (1.2.6) in a web application (for logging user errors not logged by the server); I've gotten the basic logging system to work in stand-alone apps, e.g. this code works: import org.apache.log4j.Logger; import org.apache.log4j.BasicConfigurator; import org.apache

cvs commit: jakarta-log4j/src/xdocs/stylesheets project.xml

2002-10-18 Thread ceki
ceki2002/10/17 03:20:52 Modified:src/xdocs download.xml src/xdocs/stylesheets project.xml Log: - Added link to the Korean translation of log4j site. - Minor wording changes in download.xml. Revision ChangesPath 1.55 +8 -7 jakarta-log4j/sr

RE: [VOTE] Requiring JDK 1.2

2002-10-18 Thread Ceki Gülcü
At 15:05 17.10.2002 -0700, you wrote: I do not know what all of the 1.2 dependent bits are, but it should be possible to abstract those components into interfaces and create version specific instances from a factory. So, for the NDC bits, you can abstract the ThreadLocal usage, and use a substi