On Oct 9, 2011, at 10:34 PM, Scott Deboy wrote: > Can we drive to a resolution on this issue? Does this require a vote? I'd > like to do something to get the receivers and component code and Chainsaw out > of purgatory. I would prefer to either pull receivers and component in to > core (since the dom defines these objects and it seems to have things > parseable by our dtd in core), or alternatively pull it all in to extras. > > Scott >
Moving the component and receivers to Chainsaw is low effort and still a desirable approach in my opinion. Gary Gregory would be able to continue to use XmlSocketReceiver, he would just need to distribute an officially released Chainsaw.jar instead of a SVN snapshot jars of component and receivers. Moving component and receivers to extras is not a substantial amount of work and would be my second choice. Moving component and receivers to core would be more work given the peculiarities of the tests. It took a couple of hours just to move the Rewrite appenders and their tests. I don't see an immediate need to delete components or receivers from SVN. We still have log4j 1.3 visible in SVN if anyone wanted to mine it for anything. We can appropriately note their integration into Chainsaw and drop them as entries in the navigation. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
