What was the basic spin of the discussion? "It's easy, just gotta do it.", "It seems easy, but <problem> is going to be a real problem", "This is a good idea.", "This is a bad idea"?
BTW: since I just joined this list, I outta introduce myself. I wrote the Category Tree for Chainsaw. "But Chainsaw doesn't have a Category Tree?!?" Ahhh, but it does: http://traxel.com/img/chainsaw-screen-01.png And a brand spankin' new SourceForge project: http://sourceforge.net/projects/logui/ Here's a recent build if you don't want to go through the hassle of CVS'ing it. http://traxel.com/tools/chainsaw.tar.gz Requires Log4j 1.1.3 (hence my interest in solving the version issue) On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Paul Glezen wrote: > Anyone pursuing this might have a look at the log4j-dev archives. We > discussed this topic at length back in June or July. > > - Paul > > Paul Glezen > Consulting IT Specialist > IBM Software Services for WebSphere > 818 539 3321 > > > Ceki Gulcu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 11/16/2001 08:38:01 AM > > Please respond to "Log4J Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Log4J Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: > Subject: RE: Question about the properties file. Please Help. > > > > > Hello, > > Anyone interested in adding version support for LoggingEvent serialization? > Currently, the sending side and the receiving side of a LoggingEvent have > to have the same fields. If a field is added or if a field is removed in > LoggingEvent from one log4j version to the next, if the log4j versions do > not match, then serialization does not work. > > It would be useful if we could gracefully handle *some* changes in > LoggingEvent. This is quite a nice software engineering problem. Regards, > Ceki -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
