On 12/12/2007, at 5:27 PM, Jacob Kjome wrote:
Paul Smith wrote:
cool, bug found. Now, any consensus on naming patterns? I'd plan
to prefix all thread names with 'log4j-' and use a sensible suffice
depending on the usage (make it aligned with the class name that
launched it if that mad
Paul Smith wrote:
cool, bug found. Now, any consensus on naming patterns? I'd plan to
prefix all thread names with 'log4j-' and use a sensible suffice
depending on the usage (make it aligned with the class name that
launched it if that made logical sense).
Unless there's no objections I'l
cool, bug found. Now, any consensus on naming patterns? I'd plan to
prefix all thread names with 'log4j-' and use a sensible suffice
depending on the usage (make it aligned with the class name that
launched it if that made logical sense).
Unless there's no objections I'll try that approac
See:
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41156
Jake
Paul Smith wrote:
I'm certain there's a bugzilla ticket for this, but even if there wasn't
there should be, but we are the middle of cleaning up thread names in
our app to easily identify their uses, and ran into the FileWatchd
I'm certain there's a bugzilla ticket for this, but even if there
wasn't there should be, but we are the middle of cleaning up thread
names in our app to easily identify their uses, and ran into the
FileWatchdog.
Obviously a consistent pattern of thread names would be good across
log4j th
