Folks already know how I feel about the subject: We should try to maintain backward compatibility and give up when it causes too much pain.
This problem has been discussed (rehashed) numerous times. Can we come to agreement, for the benefit of log4j users who for various reasons must use old versions of log4j, which capabilities are and are not backward compatible? http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=110909117900001&r=1&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=109527464400003&r=1&w=2 Scott -----Original Message----- From: Curt Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 2/25/2005 12:48 PM To: Log4J Developers List Cc: Subject: Re: AppenderSkeleton.isActive, etc On Feb 25, 2005, at 1:22 PM, Ceki Gülcü wrote: > > Curt, > > While I appreciate your efforts in resolving the Gump failure with the > Hivemind tests, what we have currently works just fine and is quite > simple to understand. Could we please move on? > I can't stress how strongly that I believe these changes are bad and will unnecessarily cause some users of 1.2 to stay with log4j 1.2 or encounter broken behavior during the migration. I was disappointed that such significant changes were initially committed (back on the 18th) without any prior discussion or announcement. If I missed it, I apologize. I think it is inappropriate to attempt to preemptively suppress a discussion. I think that I raised legitimate technical issues that should been discussed much earlier. I know that we disagree, I'd like to see what the rest of the list thinks. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<<winmail.dat>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
