Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Ok - no enableLogging. But what about previous questions? To avoid
dependency, switch should be made, isn't it?
Yes. It's not required for 2.2 but we should definitly have it replaced
for 2.3; the sooner the better, so if
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Switching to Cocoon 2.3 (2.5 or 3.0 - whatever we will name it) will
change the contracts for components fundamentally. This means that
all exisiting components need to be rewritten anyway
Why?
will Avalon interfaces, e.g.
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
For me the most important aspect in this matter is that users
shouldn't be forced to recompile their stuff if they don't want to.
I don't think this is a realistic expectation for the major (2.X is
major in our numbering scheme) release. I'd totall
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> Ok - no enableLogging. But what about previous questions? To avoid
> dependency, switch should be made, isn't it?
>
Yes. It's not required for 2.2 but we should definitly have it replaced
for 2.3; the sooner the better, so if you want to go ahe
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
For me the most
important aspect in this matter is that users shouldn't be forced to
recompile their stuff if they don't want to.
I don't think this is a realistic expectation for the major (2.X is major in our
numbering scheme) release. I'd totally agree with you on min
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Hi,
Ok I'm confused about AbstractLogEnabled business. Is it correct that
instead of org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.AbstractLogEnabled we
should be using org.apache.cocoon.util.AbstractLogEnabled [1]?
If yes, why there are only 2 usag
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ok I'm confused about AbstractLogEnabled business. Is it correct that
> instead of org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.AbstractLogEnabled we
> should be using org.apache.cocoon.util.AbstractLogEnabled [1]?
>
> If yes, why there are only
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Hi,
Ok I'm confused about AbstractLogEnabled business. Is it correct that
instead of org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.AbstractLogEnabled we
should be using org.apache.cocoon.util.AbstractLogEnabled [1]?
If yes, why there are only 2 usages of the latter and a
Hi,
Ok I'm confused about AbstractLogEnabled business. Is it correct that instead of
org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.AbstractLogEnabled we should be using
org.apache.cocoon.util.AbstractLogEnabled [1]?
If yes, why there are only 2 usages of the latter and around 100 usages of the
f
