- Original Message -
From: "Endre Stølsvik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Log4J Developers List"
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 5:21 AM
Subject: Re: Revisiting Log4j Releases
But still: Just Get It Done! I am afraid of "a new 1.3" that slips and
slip
On Mon, 23 May 2005, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
| On Monday 23 May 2005 12:44, Mark Womack wrote:
| > Option 2 - 1.2.11 with just jms (and maybe throw in the bug fixes for the
| > current 1.2.12 scheduled release). 1.3 based on last release of 1.2.X with
| > the TRACE changes and some more deprecation
On Monday 23 May 2005 12:44, Mark Womack wrote:
> Option 2 - 1.2.11 with just jms (and maybe throw in the bug fixes for the
> current 1.2.12 scheduled release). 1.3 based on last release of 1.2.X with
> the TRACE changes and some more deprecation in prep for the next major
> release. 1.4 release
OK, so maybe I was a bit hasty in having the vote for all the release
numbers, but really, folks can -1 my proposals without having to worry about
my feelings. Really. And, by calling the vote, I want to follow it up with
action, not just have the discussion fad into obscurity.
However you w
