On Dec 22, 2005, at 11:59 AM, Mark Womack wrote:
I still see the old report at
http://people.apache.org/~carnold/compatibility.html.
Let me know when you've had a chance to update it.
Should be there now. Don't know what happened earlier.
Maybe we should start a wiki page on the specifi
I still see the old report at
http://people.apache.org/~carnold/compatibility.html.
Let me know when you've had a chance to update it.
Maybe we should start a wiki page on the specifics of the report so
everyone can dig in to address various parts.
-Mark
On 12/21/05, Curt Arnold <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Dec 21, 2005, at 8:06 PM, Mark Womack wrote:
Curt,
I'm confused by some of the items in the report. For example, there
is this one:
o.a.l.net.SocketHubAppender Class
org.apache.log4j.net.SocketHubAppender removed
but when I look at the head, o.a.l.net.SocketHubAppender is there.
So, w
Curt,
I'm confused by some of the items in the report. For example, there
is this one:
o.a.l.net.SocketHubAppender Class org.apache.log4j.net.SocketHubAppender
removed
but when I look at the head, o.a.l.net.SocketHubAppender is there.
So, why does the report say it was removed?
-Mark
>
As mentioned in http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
id=37965, I've modified the 1.3 SyslogAppender to be API compatible
with 1.2. I've preserved the implementation changes in the 1.3
branch, but I suspect that the previous 1.3 branch code did not work
since its activateOptions m
