logging-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gülcü <c...@qos.ch>
Subject Re: [Site] Ideas? Requests?
Date Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:37:23 GMT

There were two typos in my previous message. Here is the corrected
version:

We have not reached a decision about whether only one or both of
log4cplus and log4cxx should join. The question is still open. I
suspect it will mostly depend on the reaction of the of the
log4cplus and log4cxx communities.

At 06:20 PM 1/5/2004 +0100, you wrote:
>Hi Berin,
>
>We have not a decision about whether only one or both of log4cplus and 
>log4cxx should join. The question is still open. I suspect it will be 
>mostly depend on the reaction of the of the log4cplus and log4cxx communities.
>
>Regards,
>
>At 10:56 AM 12/25/2003 +1100, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
>>I notice that the list marks both log4cplus and log4cxx as being in 
>>incubation.  Are both versions getting incorporated into 
>>logging.apache.org, and are they formally in incubation yet?
>>
>>I haven't seen them come in to incubation?  Mind you - if the logging PMC 
>>has voted to accept them, then it's just a formality to get them in.
>>
>>Merry Christmas :>.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>         Berin
>
>--
>Ceki Gülcü
>
>      For log4j documentation consider "The complete log4j manual"
>      ISBN: 2970036908 http://www.qos.ch/shop/products/clm_t.jsp
>

-- 
Ceki Gülcü

      For log4j documentation consider "The complete log4j manual"
      ISBN: 2970036908 http://www.qos.ch/shop/products/clm_t.jsp  



Mime
View raw message