On Jun 23, 2007, at 11:32 AM, Scott Deboy wrote:
The test case looks fine.
Anyone opposed to me merging this into the 1.2 branch, added to a
new org.apache.log4j.jul package.
Yes, I am opposed at the moment. log4j 1.2.15's release is imminent
and would really like to avoid adding a n
In trunk, LoggingEvent has some mutable fields (message, renderedmessage,
others).
I take advantage of the mutability of renderedmessage in ReflectionFilter
(which isn't in the filters module yet, btw) - if a 'message' field exists on
the logged object, the logging event's rendered message is s
The test case looks fine.
Anyone opposed to me merging this into the 1.2 branch, added to a new
org.apache.log4j.jul package.
Scott Deboy
COMOTIV SYSTEMS
111 SW Columbia Street Ste. 950
Portland, OR 97201
Telephone: 503.224.7496
Cell: 503.997.1367
Fax:503.222.0185
I've already uploaded the code to issue 42664 (include test case).
anything else I can do?
thanks.
Sagi Mann
--
*From:* Paul Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Sent:* Sat 6/23/2007 00:43
*To:* Log4J Developers List
*Subject:* Re: JUL appender
I don't think you have ac
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project logging-log4j-chainsaw has an issue affecting its community integration.
This iss
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project logging-log4j-chainsaw has an issue affecting its community integration.
This iss
