OK, lets do it like that.
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> 1.2.17.1?
>
> Gary
>
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Christian Grobmeier
> wrote:
>>
>> Then how would we number bugfixes for extras then? (unlikely, but what if)
>>
>> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Jess Holl
1.2.17.1?
Gary
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> Then how would we number bugfixes for extras then? (unlikely, but what if)
>
> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Jess Holle wrote:
> > That'd work too.
> >
> >
> > On 5/4/2013 8:53 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >>
> >> Why
I have just compare all files I found duplicated.
These two have additional functionality:
FormattingInfo.java
PatternParser.java
Its just minor things, like adding of padding. I copied the features
over to log4j. If I remove these classes right now, extras would
depend on a snapshot which is no
Then how would we number bugfixes for extras then? (unlikely, but what if)
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Jess Holle wrote:
> That'd work too.
>
>
> On 5/4/2013 8:53 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>> Why not number the extras module the same as the version of log4j it
>> requires?
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> O
That'd work too.
On 5/4/2013 8:53 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
Why not number the extras module the same as the version of log4j it requires?
Gary
On May 4, 2013, at 8:33, Jess Holle wrote:
On 5/4/2013 7:02 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
Thank you for reminding me. I did a quick check, then I s
Why not number the extras module the same as the version of log4j it requires?
Gary
On May 4, 2013, at 8:33, Jess Holle wrote:
> On 5/4/2013 7:02 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> Thank you for reminding me. I did a quick check, then I saw its
>> actually worse. I found a couple of classes whic
On 5/4/2013 7:02 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
Thank you for reminding me. I did a quick check, then I saw its
actually worse. I found a couple of classes which we need to look into
before can make this release. Not even that they are duplicated, I
found one class which has a different implement
Thank you for reminding me. I did a quick check, then I saw its
actually worse. I found a couple of classes which we need to look into
before can make this release. Not even that they are duplicated, I
found one class which has a different implementation. :-(
That said, I would like to require com
apache-log4j-extras-1.2.jar contains redundant copies of many of the
log4j classes.
This was an issue in log4j-extras 1.1 as well, so this is not new. See
the "Serious log4j-extras issue" thread from Dec. 7th, 2012.
As per that thread, I've had some rather nasty experiences with this in
the
