DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG� RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34661>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND� INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34661 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-31 07:49 ------- I still don't understand that bit with the else around the log4j discovery. If someone has specified an explicit logclass, ie if (specifiedLogClassName != null) is true then surely: * we create an instance of the specified class and return it, or * we fail with an exception I don't think we should *ever* fall back to discovery mode if specifiedLogClassName is not null. So I would write this: if (specifiedLogClassName != null) { try { // note: createLogClass never returns null.. result = createLogClass(...); return result; } catch(LogConfigurationException ex) { // this type of exception means we've alread output diagnostics // about this issue, etc.; just pass it on throw ex; } catch(Throwable t) { // log problem, and potentially throw an exception if the user // doesn't want recovery from flawed discovery handleFlawedDiscovery(..); // even if configuration info states that we should recover from // flawed logging classes, we *never* recover from a flawed log // which was explicitly specified by the user... throw new LogConfigurationException(t); } // this if-statement never exits! } // test for log4j try { result = ..... -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
