On Jan 6, 2005, at 4:15 PM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
I'd still like to see LoggerRepositoryAware disappear in favor of
passing in the LoggerRepository in the constructor, but would not do
that just at this moment.
This reminds me of "Forms Of Dependency Injection"
http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/
ceki2005/01/06 15:16:51
Modified:src/java/org/apache/log4j LogManager.java
Log:
no changes
Revision ChangesPath
1.33 +1 -0 logging-log4j/src/java/org/apache/log4j/LogManager.java
Index: LogManager.java
=
ceki2005/01/06 15:15:54
Modified:tests/input/db append-with-jndi1.xml
append-with-drivermanager1.xml
append-with-pooled-datasource1.xml
append-with-datasource1.xml
read-with-drivermanager1
ceki2005/01/06 14:38:35
Modified:src/java/org/apache/log4j/spi ComponentBase.java
Log:
same but shorter
Revision ChangesPath
1.4 +2 -4
logging-log4j/src/java/org/apache/log4j/spi/ComponentBase.java
Index: ComponentBase.java
=
ceki2005/01/06 14:20:14
Modified:src/java/org/apache/log4j/spi ComponentBase.java
Log:
Let successive setLR() calls with the same LR proceed without throwing an
exception.
Revision ChangesPath
1.3 +4 -2
logging-log4j/src/java/org/apache/log4j/spi/Componen
At 11:02 PM 1/6/2005, Curt Arnold wrote:
Would like Appender and other existing interfaces to NOT extend
LoggerRepositoryAware.
I'd still like to see LoggerRepositoryAware disappear in favor of passing
in the LoggerRepository in the constructor, but would not do that just at
this moment.
This r
+1 on rename of Component to LoggingRepositoryAware.
Don't like LRABase, okay with ComponentBase, LoggerComponentBase or
LoggingComponentBase.
Would like Appender and other existing interfaces to NOT extend
LoggerRepositoryAware.
I'd still like to see LoggerRepositoryAware disappear in favor of
psmith 2005/01/06 13:54:23
Modified:.build.xml
Log:
Small fix so that the webstart target can be run from the main build file and
generate correctly.
Revision ChangesPath
1.133 +7 -0 logging-log4j/build.xml
Index: build.xml
==
just doing that now and testing.
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
At 10:18 PM 1/6/2005, you wrote:
I'm happy with that, but looking at the build-chainsaw.xml file,
wouldn't it only save the property definitions at the top, and
perhaps the clean target?
I removed the "init", "clean", "jar" and "javadoc" targets
At 10:18 PM 1/6/2005, you wrote:
I'm happy with that, but looking at the build-chainsaw.xml file, wouldn't
it only save the property definitions at the top, and perhaps the clean target?
I removed the "init", "clean", "jar" and "javadoc" targets. I probably
broke the webstart related target. You'
ceki2005/01/06 13:39:29
Modified:.build-chainsaw.xml build.xml
Log:
- Removed duplicate entries under the assumption that build-chainsaw.xml can
be invoked only thourgh build.xml
- Removed the javadoc target.
- Probably broke the webstart targets.
Revision Chan
At 10:18 PM 1/6/2005, you wrote:
I'm happy with that, but looking at the build-chainsaw.xml file, wouldn't
it only save the property definitions at the top, and perhaps the clean target?
If this is all that is needed, I can make that change.
I am at it.
--
Ceki Gülcü
The complete log4j manual:
I'm happy with that, but looking at the build-chainsaw.xml file,
wouldn't it only save the property definitions at the top, and perhaps
the clean target?
If this is all that is needed, I can make that change.
cheers,
Paul Smith
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
Hello,
Can we assume that build-chainsaw.xml is ne
Hello,
Can we assume that build-chainsaw.xml is never invoked directly but only
through build.xml? If that were true, we could reduce duplication in
build-chainsaw.xml.
--
Ceki Gülcü
The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/
--
I think what Mark was saying was correct, in that the base/abstract
class could end up supporting more than just that the *Aware interface,
so the name of the base class should not be tied to one specific
interface name. ComponentBase is not a bad choice if it wasn't for the
fact that there is
At 09:04 PM 1/6/2005, you wrote:
+1 too, that's a nice specific name. Still not too happy with
ComponentBase though. LoggingComponentBase?
How about LRAwareBase?
--
Ceki Gülcü
The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/
+1 too, that's a nice specific name. Still not too happy with
ComponentBase though. LoggingComponentBase?
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
+1 to LoggerRepositoryAware.
At 06:13 PM 1/6/2005, you wrote:
How about "LoggerRepositoryAware" for the name of the interface? This
follows the pattern the Spring framew
Jake et al.,
After pervasive modifications in the internals of log4j, initial tests
under TC 5.5 show that log4j will correctly separate all logging
output, event those internally generated, according to
LoggerRepository lines defined by the user's web-applications.
Given the extent of the surgery,
ceki2005/01/06 11:31:40
Modified:src/java/org/apache/log4j LogManager.java
Log:
Minor change
Revision ChangesPath
1.32 +2 -0 logging-log4j/src/java/org/apache/log4j/LogManager.java
Index: LogManager.java
===
+1 to LoggerRepositoryAware.
At 06:13 PM 1/6/2005, you wrote:
How about "LoggerRepositoryAware" for the name of the interface? This
follows the pattern the Spring framework uses to name interfaces that define
allowed setter methods (ie ApplicationContextAware interface defines a
method setApplicat
How about "LoggerRepositoryAware" for the name of the interface? This
follows the pattern the Spring framework uses to name interfaces that define
allowed setter methods (ie ApplicationContextAware interface defines a
method setApplicationContext(ApplicationContext ac)).
ComponentBase could still
I use it.
They are used:
DatagramPacket dp =
new DatagramPacket(buf.toString().getBytes(encoding), buf.length(),
address, port);
Scott
-Original Message-
From: Ceki Gülcü [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 1/6/2005 6:28 AM
To: log4j-dev@logging.apache.org
Cc:
Sub
Hello,
Is anyone using the MulticastAppender? It looks to me like it couldn't
possibly work as the port and address values are never used.
--
Ceki Gülcü
The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/
-
To unsubscribe, e-mai
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project logging-log4j has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue affect
24 matches
Mail list logo
