Good news, my change is already implemented as a new log4j bridge (the existing log4j bridge is final so I couldn't extend it). So that part is already done. In essence I copied the original bridge, factory and logger, into Log4jTraceFactory and Log4jTraceLogger. Then made minor changes for trace support. I don't like the names so if you have better ones please share. Does anyone else find that happens to them. I.e. taking longer to find a good name than it does to actually write the code?
I am more than happy to cut my teeth on test cases and documentation. I know what you mean about documentation and test cases taking as much if not more time. In this case much more since the code only took 30 minutes to write.
As for the test cases. 95% of my test case can be accomplished by copying the log4j test case (with some mods of course) and adding some tests for the different things you can do to set the Trace level. Does this sound reasonable?
As for docs I don't see anything in the commons-logging source I have. I have found this http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/logging/userguide.html but can't see where that is stored/ersioned. Is that where docs are needed? Perhaps a faq entry "How can I get tae support for log4j?" or when you say docs are you just referring to good javadocs?
robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 21 Jan 2004, at 21:29, Glen wrote:
I have made some modifications to commons-logging that allow log4j to log trace() calls as a Trace level (as opposed to using debug for both debug and trace). It allows you to specify a custom trace level (or use the supplied one) via commons-logging.properties OR by calling a method on the commons logging log4j factory.
Is this something that people would be interested in having in commons-logging?
this reminds me of couple of things that i was planning on doing a while ago (but got a bit sidetracked). i planning to add a log4j bridge for the older API and also one that logged trace calls to a custom trace level.
so, i'd probably support a new bridge class which logs trace to a custom trace level (i think this would be less confusing for users and also easier to maintain than adding this feature to the existing class).
unless some other folks jump in, i'd be glad to take a look at this.
if you do fancy contributing some code, please read http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/patches.html and remember to include the ASF license on all new source you submit. i'd also like to say that unit tests and documentation patches are (if anything) more valuable contributions than the actual source. (i typically spend equal amounts of time documenting and creating the source for a new feature and more than either on creating unit tests.)
If so who is the person that is a committer for commons-logging? I have looked at the commons-logging page and it doesn't list any committers...
we are borg...patches will be assimilated
(http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/contributors.html gives the only list that really matters, there's also a status file in CVS which makes tallying votes easier.)
at apache, we try to keep as much as possible on list and the development is collective. (so there isn't really a single person in charge of commons-logging.)
- robert
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
