On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 21:47 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote:
No, I was not aware of that change ... but does it actually work?
Declaring something Serializable is not by itself sufficient if there
are transient variables inside the implementation. (On a separate
thread on commons-dev, I
+1 for dependency on commons-logging 1.0.4
BTW, Stan (Silvert), how do you solve these logging issues in JBoss?
AFAIK, JBoss has only one central log4j configuration. However, is
there a way to config logging per eapp or webapp? If yes, how does
JBoss address those issues with shared classes?
Yes +1 for 1.0.4. Thanks for explaining all of this.
On 2/21/06, Manfred Geiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for dependency on commons-logging 1.0.4
BTW, Stan (Silvert), how do you solve these logging issues in JBoss?
AFAIK, JBoss has only one central log4j configuration. However, is
there a
On 2/19/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 22:33 -0800, Adam Winer wrote:
Weee if you implement StateHolder, this isn't an issue.
The public no-arg constructor will be used, variable initializer
expressions will run, etc.
If you implement
On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 11:51 -0800, Adam Winer wrote:
IIRC, you have a personal stake in this issue, but the
plain truth is that there is no war anymore - java.util.logging
won by Sun's fiat. Technical superiority is not the ultimate
arbiter.
Yes, I am a commons-logging committer. That
On 2/20/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 11:51 -0800, Adam Winer wrote:
IIRC, you have a personal stake in this issue, but the
plain truth is that there is no war anymore - java.util.logging
won by Sun's fiat. Technical superiority is not the ultimate
Hi Craig,
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 17:56 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote:
There *is* a JSF-specific consideration to think about, if you have
classes that implement StateHolder (like a UIComponent
implementation). Log instances will generally *not* be serializable,
so you will need to deal
On 2/20/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Craig,On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 17:56 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote: There *is* a JSF-specific consideration to think about, if you have classes that implement StateHolder (like a UIComponent implementation).Log instances will generally *not* be
ok - so that means we'll need to drop static?
won't that cause performance problems?
regards,
Martin
On 2/19/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 00:46 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: mmarinschek
Date: Sat Feb 18 16:46:18 2006
New Revision: 378805
On 2/19/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 00:46 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: mmarinschek
Date: Sat Feb 18 16:46:18 2006
New Revision: 378805
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=378805view=rev
Log:
minor changes in application-factory,
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 11:36 +0100, Martin Marinschek wrote:
ok - so that means we'll need to drop static?
Yes. In fact, because MyFaces libs are often placed in a shared
classpath, static should be avoided in almost all cases I expect.
won't that cause performance problems?
Calling
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 20:27 +0100, Manfred Geiler wrote:
On 2/19/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just a warning to all developers: when using commons-logging in a
library, STATIC fields must **NOT** be used to store Log objects.
The problem is that the class may be called with
]
Subject: Re: svn commit: r378805 -
/myfaces/core/trunk/impl/src/main/java/org/apache/myfaces/application/ApplicationFactoryImpl.java
wo-ow.
it's great to learn a new thing every day ;)
regards,
Martin
On 2/19/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 20:27 +0100, Manfred
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 17:56 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote:
Simon,
Could you do me a favor and publicize this in the Struts community as
well? The framework code there is littered with static log instances
to.
Will do.
You might also want to add some notes related to using Log
On 2/19/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 17:56 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote: Simon, Could you do me a favor and publicize this in the Struts community as well?The framework code there is littered with static log instances
to.Will do.You might also want to add
Weee if you implement StateHolder, this isn't an issue.
The public no-arg constructor will be used, variable initializer
expressions will run, etc.
If you implement Serializable instead, then Craig's totally right -
transient variables will not be re-initialized. You can deal with
this
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 22:33 -0800, Adam Winer wrote:
Weee if you implement StateHolder, this isn't an issue.
The public no-arg constructor will be used, variable initializer
expressions will run, etc.
If you implement Serializable instead, then Craig's totally right -
transient
On 2/19/06, Martin Marinschek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Indeed.this really means I'd be willing to switch to JDK logging. What wasthe reason again we couldn't do that?If we are willing to live with a JDK 1.4 or later restriction, no reason at all. That, however, would seem to be an issue for some
Hmm... didn't we settle on JDK 1.4 a while ago?
Simon has some other arguments on not using JDK logging, see above.
regards,
Martin
On 2/20/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/19/06, Martin Marinschek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Indeed.
this really means I'd be willing to
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 00:46 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: mmarinschek
Date: Sat Feb 18 16:46:18 2006
New Revision: 378805
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=378805view=rev
Log:
minor changes in application-factory, fixed readOnly referral in
HtmlRendererUtils
Modified:
20 matches
Mail list logo
