On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 03:16 -0700, Mark Palmer wrote:
> What I need is a way to programatically append to the
> webapps logging context.
Hmm. So given a webapp which might have log4j bundled with it, when that
webapp calls into your code which is deployed
within the container's classpath you want
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 09:49 -0700, Mark Palmer wrote:
> I have written a open source version of jta for tomcat
> that can be used with and the existing version of
> apache DBCP. (to be released shortly)
>
> I am using log4j of course:-)
>
> My code and needs to be common/lib (i.e. don't want to
>
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 11:35 -0700, Elias Ross wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 09:49 -0700, Mark Palmer wrote:
>
> > My code and needs to be common/lib (i.e. don't want to
> > modify the web application war file in any way)
> >
> > This means log4j needs to be in common/lib as well.
>
> This is mo
On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 01:33 -0500, Jacob Kjome wrote:
> I tried updating Log4j HEAD a couple times and got the following errors...
>
> 1.
> cannot mkdir /tmp/cvs-serv28896/contribs
> No space left on device
>
> Error, CVS operation failed (exit code 1)
>
> 2.
> cannot open /tmp/cvs-serv28940/./C
Hi,
While on this subject of binary compatiblity, are you aware of the
existence of CLIRR (clirr.sourceforge.net)?
This tool can generate a report on the binary compatibility of two
versions of a library. Here's a report generated by comparing
log4j-1.2.9.jar and log4j-1.3alpha-6.jar:
http://peo
On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 16:13 -0700, Mark Womack wrote:
> This all seems sane to me. JCL will provide a way (eventually) to choose
> between the Log4j12Logger and the future Log4j13Logger? There is a request
> to add a method of determining the log4j version which we will be
> implementing for the
Simon, is there a pending release of JCL that is waiting for an answer to
> this issue? It is on my list of items to look at in more detail this
> weekend. Don't know if I will have an answer to suggest, but I hope to be
> more familiar with it.
>
> -Mark
>
> > -
On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 18:12 +1200, Simon Kitching wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-06-18 at 16:23 +0200, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> > I see your point. Assuming everyone involved in log4j is cognizant of
> > this problem, I think you can expect current arrangement of Logger,
> > Category,
On Sat, 2005-06-18 at 16:23 +0200, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> I see your point. Assuming everyone involved in log4j is cognizant of
> this problem, I think you can expect current arrangement of Logger,
> Category, Level etc. to persist through until 1.3 final.
In the 1.3alpha6 release has swapped the hie
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 21:08 -0700, Scott Deboy wrote:
> We are shooting ourselves in the foot if we don't support binary
> compatibility, considering how many folks are using commons-logging.
>
> The adoption rate of log4j 1.3 will be dramatically slower than if we
> supported binary compatibi
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 15:54 +0200, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-commons-dev&m=108504642518488&w=2
Unforunately, the referenced email just contains two further links to
the actual technical explanation. And neither of those links work.
Does anyone have working li
Hi,
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 15:54 +0200, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> >Log4j 1.3:
> > Priority now extends Level
> > Priority has no constants; it just inherits them from Level
> > Logger still extends Category
> > Category now has methods that take Level objects
> >
> >This implies that any code tha
Hi Log4j developers,
I'm a maintainer of jakarta commons-logging. We're preparing for a new
release and I'm checking up on compatibility with what will become log4j
version 1.3. We don't intend to wait for 1.3 to be released, but would
like to ensure that JCL is compatible with log4j 1.3 when you
On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 22:16 -0700, Mark Womack wrote:
> But slf4j has only been around for a month and half? Isn't it a bit early
> to call it a mistake? Sounds like there needs to be some more evangelizing
> of the JCL camp. Has the slf4j community grown in any way since its
> inception?
>
gt; -Mark
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Simon Kitching" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Log4J Developers List"
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 9:02 PM
> Subject: Re: 1.2.11rc1 Build
>
>
> > On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 13:48 +1000, Paul Smith w
On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 13:48 +1000, Paul Smith wrote:
> yep, that tar's downloading ok.
>
> The tar has an error when unpacking though, or maybe it's just a
> warning. When I do
>
> tar xfz logg*.tar.gz
>
> I get:
>
> tar: A lone zero block at 18809
That's a known bug in the Ant tar task: se
On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 10:39 -0700, Mark Womack wrote:
> I need to look at this more myself. I just want a common logging client
> interface that I can use in my code and when I do my deployments that client
> interface will use whatever underlying logging framework is specified.
>
> I don't want
On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 08:50 +1000, Paul Smith wrote:
> I managed to get the log4j 1.2.9 tag, and build a jdiff report. Of
> course I would first treat this output with suspicion since it is my
> first jdiff attempt and I'm bound to have got something wrong.
> Unfortunately it's over 1meg an
On Sat, 2005-04-30 at 22:09 -0500, Jacob Kjome wrote:
> >I am not a member of the slf4j team, so I cannot speak to it's goals, etc.
>
> I think just about any Log4j committer is part of the slf4j team, unless I
> am mistaken. I'm guessing that this probably also extends to
> commons-logging de
On Sat, 2005-04-30 at 18:16 -0700, Mark Womack wrote:
> Even though slf4j inherits everything from the former log4j UGLI interfaces,
> it seems to me that part of its reason for existence is to foster some
> common, neutral area where the members of the Logging Services team, the JCL
> team, and
Simon Kitching wrote:
Having some real code/unit-tests to demonstrate the pros and cons of
different approaches is much healthier than abstract theorising, and
will hopefully be able to make it crystal clear which scenarios are
better handled by which approach. Ceki posted some very useful demo
Hi All,
The set of people actually interested in working on JCL seems to have
dwindled back to two again (at least for the moment): Robert Donkin and
myself. And I´m still on holiday until this time next week; I´m
following the email discussions but can´t do any active work on things
now. Note,
Jeff Turner wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 05:55:36PM +0100, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
...
By the same token, many developers are strongly repulsed by that same
brand. (I've heard of several oss project who won't touch jakarta commons
with a 12-feet pole because of its reliance on JCL.)
Yes - but unfo
Hi All,
I´m a commons committer and have been involved in the recent
commons-logging work going on there. I thought you might be interested
in a view of this topic from "the other side of the fence". Note,
however, that I am speaking only for myself in the rest of the email.
It is accepted that
On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 15:55, Simon Kitching wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've just completed a patch for SMTPAppender which uses NDC to filter
> the messages in the generated email so that only buffered messages which
> are "related" to the triggering event are included in t
ONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
* See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
* limitations under the License.
+ *
+ * This file has been modified by Simon Kitching, The Electronic Commerce
+ * Network Ltd. This modified version puts into the email only me
26 matches
Mail list logo
