Geir Magnusson made the specific request for TRACE on behalf of the Geronimo project in Nov 2003. We have put that functionality into v1.3. I think it is something we should make available before 1.3. (I suspect that we may be working on v1.3 longer than the stated 10/2005, but I plan to push otherwise). Log4j users seem to want to indulge this bad habit.
In practice, I doubt that deployments are going to use different versions of log4j on various machines pushing logging events over the wire. I could be wrong. But all is well if all parties involved use the same version of log4j, right? Will we need to document this change so that folks know what they are getting into? You bet. Should this stop us from moving forward? I don't think so, but I am an army of one. I am not imposing an unbending will here. I made it part of the proposal because I thought it was important and I felt we should move forward. If anyone wants to call a vote to change the proposal that already passed, then let's do it. We could always call it a different version than 1.2.X, but people seemed to think that was too confusing since it would use or skip the 1.3 version moniker we have already been working on and releasing alpha versions of. -Mark > -----Original Message----- > From: Ceki Gülcü [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 12:54 PM > To: Log4J Developers List > Subject: RE: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Overview Proposal > > At 20:37 5/18/2005, you wrote: > >There seems to be fairly broad support for it. No one voted -1 for the > >proposal. > > > >It is in addition to the constants and methods that are already there, so > it > >(hopefully) meets the requirement of not being harmful to existing > >deployments. Developers that have extended to support trace may have > >issues, but they can stay at 1.2.11 until they are ready to take the > plunge > >with 1.2.12 or 1.3. > > > >I guess, define "everyone" for me. > > I'd lean against adding the TRACE level to the 1.2 branch. Scott and Jake > may feel the same way. In my opinion, the TRACE level promotes bad habits, > especially in light of the confusion between TRACE and DEBUG. There is > also the question of backward compatibility over the wire. If TRACE was > introduced in 1.2.11 it would be incompatible with versions 1.2.9 and > earlier. > > > > > -- > Ceki Gülcü > > The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/ > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
