On 24/06/2007, at 7:03 AM, Curt Arnold wrote:
On Jun 23, 2007, at 11:32 AM, Scott Deboy wrote:
The test case looks fine.
Anyone opposed to me merging this into the 1.2 branch, added to a
new org.apache.log4j.jul package.
Yes, I am opposed at the moment. log4j 1.2.15's release is
On Jun 24, 2007, at 3:47 AM, Paul Smith wrote:
I haven't been tracking the JUL - log4j stuff as well as I would
like, but there are enough things that I'm unsettled with that I'm
not ready to see them in an imminent release.
If you're feeling unsettled, I would appreciate it if you could
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-chainsaw has an issue affecting its community integration.
This
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42664.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
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-tests has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
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-tests has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
