It's just a poll, we have to draw the line somewhere and polish and address
Jiras for 2.1. I know we operate in what feels sometimes like a
free-for-all but it seems appropriate to slow things down a bit before we
think of releasing. We also operate in a "do-ocracy" so I do not think any
one will stop you from merging if that what you think is best.

Gary

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote:

> The code, tests and docs are ready and I was about to merge the LOG4J2-431
> branch into master.
> Why are we having a poll about this appender? What makes it different
> from, say, GELFLayout?
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Any thoughts on merging the MMA for 2.1 vs. 2.2?
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Reply via email to