Following Justin asking me to take care of any 0.18 approval requests while he is on vacation I have now merged these changes to the 0.18 branch (which isn't as bad it reads, honest; even though I sent the request most of the changes were not mine and three people have now reviewed them all).
Robbie On 2 August 2012 18:29, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Justin, > > I would like to request that the following JIRAs/commits be considered for > inclusion in 0.18: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4184 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1368597 > > This changes the broker log4j config to turn queue threshold notifications > back on, as we inadvertantly managed to turn them off during 0.18 > development. No change/risk to the broker itself. > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4173 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1368528 > > This changes the broker log4j config to turn off logging of subscription > state changes, as it is incredibly verbose in various situations and > completely drowns out all the other logging so some people just turn off > everything as a result. No change/risk to the broker itself. > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4172 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1368519 > > This restores a thread name after completing a task, to avoid leaving > threads around with stale names. Very contained and low risk change. > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4182 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1368506 > > This sets a default minimum gap between threshold notifications, to avoid > spamming the log file when it is not configured in the configuration files > (and I notice our shipping config even contains such a non-configured > virtualhost). Very contained and low risk change. > > The changes were made either by Alex, Phil, or myself, and have then been > reviewed by at least one of the others. > > Robbie > >
