On Sun, Feb 18, 2001 at 08:39:56PM -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
> No question that this isn't Turbine's fault.
>
> Without gump, how long would this incompatibility gone unnoticed?
>
> There undoubtably are other projects out there using log4j. If each binds
> to a specific release and there isn't a period of deprecation, which
> version of the jar file do you put first in your classpath?
>
> The owner of the log4j project has been notified. At least twice - once by
> me and once by Jon.
>
> Still consider this a problem with Gump? ;-)
No, this is a very useful service. I guess I read Jon's message as "look
Gump says the turbine build was failing, somebody fix it" - whereas
actually it was saying "heads up, log4j have just changed their API and
next time they release we'll need to change our code to build against
the new release".
Both types of warnings are useful, it's just important that they are
distinguished between (as Jon says, probably by education as to Gump's
purpose).
So sorry to diss your rulin' tool :-)
--
Sean Legassick
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
this.setAnimal(new Man()); try { Humanity.anyAction(); } catch
SurpriseException e { System.err.println("This should never happen!");
e.printStackTrace(); }
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
