Re: [PATCH] Logging Event

2001-05-05 Thread Mathias Bogaert
Sent = when sent via JMS..logical. +1 Regards, Mathias - Original Message - From: "Tim Dwelle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 11:00 PM Subject: [PATCH] Logging Event > I have been using Log4J 1.1b6 to log message

Re: [PATCH] Logging Event

2001-05-04 Thread Paul Glezen
versions of LoggingEvent :) ). - Paul Paul Glezen IT Specialist Software Services 818 539 3321 Ceki Gulcu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 05/04/2001 12:55:14 AM Please respond to "LOG4J Developers Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: LOG4J Developers Mailing List <[EMAIL P

Re: [PATCH] Logging Event

2001-05-04 Thread Ceki Gulcu
Hi Tim, Thanks for the new LoggingEvent.java file. As a side note, please keep in mind that unified diffs (diff -u) is the preferred way for suppying patches. This is clearly not a big deal. Coming back to the question of the timestamp, let me say that the LoggingEvent class is designed with sa

[PATCH] Logging Event

2001-05-03 Thread Tim Dwelle
I have been using Log4J 1.1b6 to log messages that I pull off a JMS publish-subscribe topic. I'd like the timeStamp of the logging event to reflect the time the message was sent via JMS, rather than the time our subscriber gets around to logging the message. The current LoggingEvent derives the