On Tue, 4 May 2004, Paul Smith wrote:
| > Frustrating? Hell yes: TRACE level!!
|
| There's nothing stopping you from taking the current source tree and going
| to town on it for your own purposes.
Yepp, I've done just that - me and log4j downtown for some serious fun..!
;)
Endre
-
> Frustrating? Hell yes: TRACE level!!
There's nothing stopping you from taking the current source tree and going
to town on it for your own purposes.
Paul
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e
At 03:43 PM 5/3/2004, Lutz Michael wrote:
Hey guys, would you please have this conversation on the developer list?
Ceki thanks for all the work you do, personally I don't care if you have a
strong leadership style. I greatly appreciate Log4j and all the work you
and your team accomplishes. Tha
At 03:34 PM 5/3/2004, Endre Stølsvik wrote:
On Mon, 3 May 2004, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
| At 10:32 AM 5/3/2004, you wrote:
| >On Sat, 1 May 2004, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
| >
| >| I am aware of the fact that this may be frustrating, especially if the
| >| chainsaw part is nearing readiness for prime time. I'd
ginal Message-
From: Endre Stølsvik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 9:34 AM
To: Log4J Users List
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
On Mon, 3 May 2004, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
| At 10:32 AM 5/3/2004, you wrote:
| >On Sat, 1 May 2004, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
| >
| >|
On Mon, 3 May 2004, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
| At 10:32 AM 5/3/2004, you wrote:
| >On Sat, 1 May 2004, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
| >
| >| I am aware of the fact that this may be frustrating, especially if the
| >| chainsaw part is nearing readiness for prime time. I'd like to finish
| >| work on DBAppedner (3-4
At 10:32 AM 5/3/2004, you wrote:
On Sat, 1 May 2004, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
| I am aware of the fact that this may be frustrating, especially if the
| chainsaw part is nearing readiness for prime time. I'd like to finish
| work on DBAppedner (3-4 days) and Joran (2-3 days) before releasing
| 1.3 alpha.
On Sat, 1 May 2004, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
| I am aware of the fact that this may be frustrating, especially if the
| chainsaw part is nearing readiness for prime time. I'd like to finish
| work on DBAppedner (3-4 days) and Joran (2-3 days) before releasing
| 1.3 alpha.
Frustrating? Hell yes: TRACE le
At 12:54 AM 4/30/2004, Paul Smith wrote:
Yes, you have some good points there. I don't think we could _guarantee_
that an interface might change, but I would think that it is incredibly
unlikely at this point. The only foreseeable changes would be additional
objects/components or methods. But
ugs in that interface.
alan
-Original Message-
From: Paul Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 5:00 PM
To: 'Log4J Users List'
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
> The reason that my company won't use alpha code but will
> write on top of
&
> The reason that my company won't use alpha code but will
> write on top of
> released code is that we contain the scope of our risk. If I
> just write
> one class and everything else is stable and trusted then our risk is
> much lower than using an unstable release where our developers would
>
ically work then I would consider it.
-Original Message-
From: James Stauffer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 6:04 PM
To: 'Log4J Users List'
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
Often for a new release the code starts out with a lot of change and
th
> Also, did I do anything wrong with my enhancement submission?
> (I understand
> if everyone is busy, etc but I was just wondering if I did
> something wrong.)
If you posted it into Bugz, don't worry, we've seen it or will see it and it
won't get lost, but if you posted it to the dev list direc
rom: Paul Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 6:16 PM
To: 'Log4J Users List'
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
If you want my own personal opinion (and not those of the log4j dev team as
a whole, although feel free to step in), I would place the CVS HE
Paul
> -Original Message-
> From: James Stauffer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 9:13 AM
> To: 'Log4J Users List'
> Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
>
>
> When I develop new code there are 3 stages (at least): in
> f
al Message-
From: James Stauffer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 6:04 PM
To: 'Log4J Users List'
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
Often for a new release the code starts out with a lot of change and then
gradually stabilizes until release. It would be go
d I do anything wrong?
-Original Message-
From: Paul Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 5:55 PM
To: 'Log4J Users List'
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
> Good point. Is there a list of known issues with 1.3 (so I
> can check if I
>
> Good point. Is there a list of known issues with 1.3 (so I
> can check if I
> need to fix anything before I use it)? One thing is that
> there may be a
> danger that some "interface" will change from now to release that will
> require changes to how we use it -- pre-release software is
> oft
more in a
state of flux and may require more work to keep up. What is the state of
1.3? How are people using it?
-Original Message-
From: Paul Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 5:16 PM
To: 'Log4J Users List'
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
> Thanks Ceki (for the great product as well as the 1.3 tip)
> but for the moment, alpha builds are off limits for my
> production environment. For the moment I've written myself a
> quick and dirty DirectoryRollingFileAppender that suits my
> very specific needs (subclassing RollingFileAppend
r and borrowing some of Daily's logic).
Thanks
alan
-Original Message-
From: Ceki Gülcü [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 11:38 AM
To: Log4J Users List
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
Alan,
As Yoav mentioned in a previous email, log4j 1.3 (currently
Alan,
As Yoav mentioned in a previous email, log4j 1.3 (currently marked as
alpha-0) has exactly what you are looking for. The method of renaming,
archiving, etc are based on strategies and hooks within a special appender
extending FileAppender, very similar to what you have described. :-)
At
TED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 10:01 AM
To: Log4J Users List
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
Hi,
>So I'm still leaning toward writing my own subclass of FileAppender
that
>merges the features of Daily and Rolling, with the Daily part of the
>functionality creating new Dire
look at JDBCAppender. If you have such huge log files, it may not be the best design
to log on disk.
-Original Message-
From: Alan Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 9:48 AM
To: Log4J Users List
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
Yes, but the
Hi,
>So I'm still leaning toward writing my own subclass of FileAppender
that
>merges the features of Daily and Rolling, with the Daily part of the
>functionality creating new Directories for the 'rolling' functionality
>to 'roll' within.
>
>In an ideal world there would be hooks inside FileAppen
Users List
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
Hi Alan & all,
I have a similar situation with one of my products. I am considering
logging to a local database.
BTW, there is a DailyRollingFileAppender already in there also.
for e.g. I have the following configuration for one of m
versionPattern=%d [%t] [%-5p] %c.%m%n
hth.
best regards,
-Samir
WorldRes, Inc.
PlacesToStay.com
"Online Hotel Reservations Worldwide".
-Original Message-
From: Alan Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 9:36 AM
To: Log4J Users List
Subject: RE: A
take a 'strategy' class as an argument that would enable this
functionality, but I can see that would not be easy to design within the
current framework.
alan
-Original Message-
From: Robert Pepersack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 5:11 AM
To: Log
You don't have to manage your disk space from within log4j. To conserve
hard-drive space, you can use classes in the java.util.zip package to zip
up your log files. You can schedule a nightly batch job that kicks off a
Java class that uses java.util.zip. The book "Java i/O" by O'Reilly gives
> From: Alan Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
> I was wondering whether anyone else has had this problem and how they
> fixed it. My current plan is to subclass RollingFileAppender and have
> it delete the last touched file when the total log-space-used
> gets above
> a certain size. Aft
30 matches
Mail list logo
