Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> > So we will change today to follow suit, I think. We have no
> > users of this feature so far, and if we do, they have been
> > using it 1 day. really.
>
> But velocity is about to have a release, right? Hopefully what goes into
> the release will be in use for more than one day... ;-)
All I was saying was that since we just added this small feature, if we
didn't get it right, or used something that was deprecated, we are happy
to change to do the 'right thing' so we are current in our release.
My read of the message to vel list was that it was possible we were
using something deprecated or recently removed by log4j.
I don't know why my statments are interpreted to be 'pushing back' or
something...
>
> > For clarity, which log4j should I build with, the release?
>
> The released version of velocity should work with the latest release of
> log4j. Ideally, this statement should also hold true if the next release
> of log4j comes before the next release of velocity.
Yes.
> IMHO, the best course of action is the one that Anders Kristensen has
> outlined. Thanks Anders!
Yes.
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
