cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <Ralph.Go...@digitalinsight.com>
Subject RE: [VOTE] RE: LogKitLoggerManager
Date Mon, 10 May 2004 20:18:27 GMT
Thanks. So we need at least one more +1 for this. Anybody?

Ralph

-----Original Message-----
From: Carsten Ziegeler [mailto:cziegeler@s-und-n.de] 
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 12:03 PM
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] RE: LogKitLoggerManager

+1

Just replace my solution.

Carsten 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Goers [mailto:Ralph.Goers@digitalinsight.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 11:09 PM
> To: 'dev@cocoon.apache.org'
> Subject: [VOTE] RE: LogKitLoggerManager
> 
> Yes, this change is backward compatible with 2.1.4, but not 
> with the version Carsten checked in last week.  I'd 
> appreciate a vote to have this patch applied.
> 
> Ralph
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joerg Heinicke [mailto:joerg.heinicke@gmx.de]
> Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 1:52 PM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: Re: LogKitLoggerManager
> 
> On 09.05.2004 19:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
> 
> > I've submitted patch 28860. I realize this is after the 
> code freeze, 
> > but
> I'd
> > prefer to see this patch instead of the current code. If 2.1.5 goes 
> > out
> with
> > the current code we would have to maintain the current behavior of 
> > logger-type.
> 
> I guess it's completely backwards compatible (same default 
> behaviour and so on). Then it can go in, but we must vote 
> about it. It's best if you start the vote yourself. But IMO 
> we should not wait 72 h for that vote as we would have only 
> Thursday to test it. 36 h are enough for this case IMO.
> 
> Joerg
> 

Mime
View raw message