Github user bodewig commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/log4net/pull/35
I've just realized there is no documentation outside of the API docs for
the other `PatternStringConverter`s either, so yes, XML comments should be
sufficient - and you've already provided that. I th
Github user JJoe2 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/log4net/pull/35
Iâll be happy to do the unit tests and possibly the doc. Are suitable
XML comments enough?
Now this is added, Iâll also be thinking about the next step, which is to
allow the PatternStri
Github user bodewig commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/log4net/pull/35
I've added your converter, many thanks.
Tests would be good and we need documentation before we can close
LOG4NET-526.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user JJoe2 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/log4net/pull/35
Hi Stefan,
That's correct, those are the only changes.
Thanks,
From: Stefan Bodewig
Sent: 23 October 2016 16:33:48
To: apache/log4
Github user bodewig commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/log4net/pull/35
Am I correct that `AppSettingPatternConverter` and the few changes in
`PatternString` are the only relevant code changes (along with adding the new
filte to the solution files)? If so, I can pick up
Github user JJoe2 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/log4net/pull/35
I'll rebase this after #36 and #37 have been processed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have thi
