cvs commit: jakarta-log4j/src/java/org/apache/log4j/chainsaw LoggingEventFieldResolver.java

2003-10-30 Thread sdeboy
sdeboy 2003/10/29 23:04:27 Modified:src/java/org/apache/log4j/chainsaw/filter EventTypeEntryContainer.java src/java/org/apache/log4j/chainsaw/rule RuleTest.java src/java/org/apache/log4j/chainsaw LoggingEventF

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Dennis Cook
Endre, I too wanted a TRACE level, but I found that it only took about 30 minute to change three files in version 1.2.8 to add it. As for domains in version 1.3 providing a better alternative, well I would sure like to see some description about them. I would also like to know if this new "d

cvs commit: jakarta-log4j/src/java/org/apache/log4j/chainsaw LoggingEventFieldResolver.java

2003-10-30 Thread sdeboy
sdeboy 2003/10/30 00:10:27 Modified:src/java/org/apache/log4j/chainsaw/rule RuleTest.java src/java/org/apache/log4j/chainsaw LoggingEventFieldResolver.java Log: added event field and operator support to expression builder's context menu Re

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Endre Stølsvik
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Ceki Gülcü wrote: | Endre, | | A number of user expressed their desire to see the TRACE level | added. However, please note that log4j domains (to be introduced | in log4j 1.3) should provide a much better alternative to adding a | TRACE level or any other level for that matte

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Endre Stølsvik
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Paul Glezen wrote: | | | | | Hi Endre, Hi Patronizing Paul. I do know and understand "The Open Source Process". Why don't you ask Ceki whether he'd include a patch for trace? Endre. - To unsubscribe, e-ma

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr .
While I probably wouldn't have had the energy to express my feelings to the same extent Endre does, TRACE would be nice. I had to write a wrapper to put trace in because as Endre notes, it's a natural thing to use when outputting chatty information during development. That said, I'd be hard pr

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24217] - default initialization of xml config file

2003-10-30 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24217] - default initialization of xml config file

2003-10-30 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

RE: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Shapira, Yoav
Howdy, >That said, I'd be hard pressed to give a coherant reason why I >shouldn't used DEBUG. But I don't. Which of course is exactly the point. The decision on which logging level to use for what is subjective. For example, I use INFO and DEBUG that way Senor Stolsvik uses DEBUG and TRACE. S

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Endre Stølsvik
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Shapira, Yoav wrote: | | Howdy, | >That said, I'd be hard pressed to give a coherant reason why I | >shouldn't used DEBUG. But I don't. | | Which of course is exactly the point. The decision on which logging | level to use for what is subjective. For example, I use INFO and

RE: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Shapira, Yoav
Howdy, I don't think you understood my bigger point. ;) I know you use levels differently than I do. My point was that what some people consider informational, other people considering debug, and vice versa. And that's OK. That's why log4j is extensible. ;) >Info is a level where -information

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Ceki Gülcü
Endre, I understand your point about having only one "development" level instead of two. However, I feel that log4j domains will provide a better alternative. I'll write a document about domains as soon as I get the chance. As for you worry about ease of use, domains will be both efficient and

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Endre Stølsvik
| All of this just illustrates that everyone uses the logging component | different. You can't assume TRACE is something everyone wants, needs, | cares about, or would use if it were present. So why aren't the levels called simply 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, then? You could even choose your direction then,

RE: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Matt Munz
> So why aren't the levels called simply 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, then? You could I prefer Up, Down, Charm, Strange, Truth, and Beauty, personally.[1] > I'm forking off the "trace4log4j" project RSN - totally tracking the log4j > package, only adding trace! Bet I'll get the entire user base right awa

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Ceki Gülcü
At 03:46 PM 10/30/2003 +0100, Endre Stølsvik wrote: | All of this just illustrates that everyone uses the logging component | different. You can't assume TRACE is something everyone wants, needs, | cares about, or would use if it were present. So why aren't the levels called simply 1, 2, 3, 4 and

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Endre Stølsvik
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Ceki Gülcü wrote: | Imagine you had another way besides the DEBUG level to categorize logging | statements (intended for debugging). For example, imagine you could | categorize logging statements related to the servlet lifecycle, application | configuration, tcp connections, d

RE: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Shapira, Yoav
Howdy, Dude, writing as if you've had too much coffee this morning is not going to win you any fans ;) OK, so you think TRACE is a necessary evil. Add it yourself to your own little log4j distribution, or trace4log4j, or whatever you want to call it, and be done with it. Why the extra aggrav

RE: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Shapira, Yoav
Howdy, I meant just necessary, not a necessary evil... ;) Yoav Shapira Millennium ChemInformatics >-Original Message- >From: Shapira, Yoav >Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 11:59 AM >To: Log4J Developers List >Subject: RE: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority. > > >Howdy, >Dude, writing a

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Endre Stølsvik
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Shapira, Yoav wrote: | | Howdy, Dude, writing as if you've had too much coffee this morning is | not going to win you any fans ;) I've only had about three cups today. Might be too little coffee that's the problem.. | | OK, so you think TRACE is a necessary evil. Add it you

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Endre Stølsvik
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Shapira, Yoav wrote: | | Howdy, | I meant just necessary, not a necessary evil... ;) (You'd like it too, wouldn't you?! Hah! Gotcha!) Endre. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional comman

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Jacob Kjome
At 06:06 PM 10/30/2003 +0100, you wrote: The deal is that I am NOT the only one that wants this. It is rather silly to fork the code for this little thing, isn't it?? It's half an hours work with three classes, apparently. But I think that this one little method makes the whole system (quite) a bit

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24217] - default initialization of xml config file

2003-10-30 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Stephen McConnell
Endre Stølsvik wrote: On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Ceki Gülcü wrote: | Imagine you had another way besides the DEBUG level to categorize logging | statements (intended for debugging). For example, imagine you could | categorize logging statements related to the servlet lifecycle, application | configur

Re: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Dennis Cook
The strange part about this whole issue is that the resistance amount of resistance to adding another level. I started monitoring this list about a month ago and when I asked about the possibility that of adding TRACE, it was articulated that lack of interest from the user base was a big fact

RE: Rationale for TRACE-level/priority.

2003-10-30 Thread Jim Moore
It's been a popular request from the user community for as long as I've been using Log4j, which was about the time it came to Jakarta. Prior to v1.2 it was a major pain to add the capability to do tracing because you would have to rewrite the Logger class, which meant you either forked the code-ba