Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 13265 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2006 23:20:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Feb 2006 23:20:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 47932 invoked by uid 500); 15 Feb 2006 23:20:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 47900 invoked by uid 500); 15 Feb 2006 23:20:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 47890 invoked by uid 99); 15 Feb 2006 23:20:54 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:20:54 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [67.116.30.6] (HELO red.amberpoint.com) (67.116.30.6) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:20:53 -0800 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (bp-work.edgility.com [10.10.11.4]) by red.amberpoint.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k1FNKU6U010131 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:20:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <43F3B73E.4050402@amberpoint.com> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:20:30 -0800 From: Bryan Pendleton User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: derby-dev@db.apache.org Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-515) Network Server should log server start and shutdown time to derby.log References: <1133741133.1140042670496.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org> In-Reply-To: <1133741133.1140042670496.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > I chose GMT to keep it consistent with what is used for Derby boot message. Sounds good. > About using xxxxxxFILTERED-VERSION-NUMBERxxxxxx, I did'nt see other tests > doing it. I saw the current pattern in tests is to add master files with > version number to release/build.xml file. I would like to know what > problems you see if there are more files in this list. Sorry, I shouldn't have introduced this red herring. I was remembering the discussion of a few weeks ago: http://www.nabble.com/forum/ViewPost.jtp?post=2342175&framed=y in which there were a bunch of problems due to having release-specific values in test output, and so I was sort of inventing a new mechanism on the spot to see if it helped. But I don't think it does; I think you should stick with the implementation in your current patch proposal. So, bottom line: thumbs up from me on your patch, and thanks for answering my questions! thanks, bryan