logging-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Womack <mwom...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release log4j-1.3a8 official
Date Wed, 01 Feb 2006 19:44:35 GMT
Well, it is a good nit.  This particular test doesn't always fail
though.  Locally on my machine it failed once, and after looking at
the code, I ran it again and it worked.  My guess is that it has
something to do with the copying of the config file not changing the
date so that the watchdog triggers or conceiveably a bug in the
FileWatchdog code someplace.

There is something similar that I have mentioned related to the
TimeBasedRolling scheme as well, though it does not seem to show up in
the Gump radar.  I get it fairly often locally.

-Mark

On 2/1/06, Scott Deboy <sdeboy@comotivsystems.com> wrote:
> A nit, but:
>
> I'd like to see logging-test not fail prior to letting a build out the door.
>
> I know we could remove the test, but could this be a regression that would necessitate
changes in the build?
>
> Reserving my vote for the moment.
>
>
> Scott Deboy
> COMOTIV SYSTEMS
> 111 SW Columbia Street Ste. 950
> Portland, OR  97201
>
> Telephone:      503.224.7496
> Cell:           503.997.1367
> Fax:            503.222.0185
>
> sdeboy@comotivsystems.com
>
> www.comotivsystems.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mwomack@google.com on behalf of Mark Womack
> Sent: Wed 2/1/2006 8:59 AM
> To: Logging General
> Subject: [VOTE] Release log4j-1.3a8 official
>
> The log4j project has voted to release log4j 1.3alpha8.  Just need PMC
> approval for official release.
>
> http://cvs.apache.org/builds/logging/log4j/log4j-1.3a8
>
> I am +1.
>
> (Maybe we should look into defining the meaning of "Product Release"
> in the LS bylaws so that we don't require the PMC to vote for every
> subproject alpha and beta release?  Unless we want that level of
> oversight.)
>
> -Mark
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message