logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Womack <mwom...@bevocal.com>
Subject RE: [Chainsaw] new version moving into log4j-sandbox
Date Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:24:56 GMT
Welcome to the sandbox, Paul & Scott!

> manifest entry so that it can be 
> easily run by a
> java -jar command.

I haven't said anything about the manifest settings we do for the chainsaw
and lf5 jars, but aren't they kind of a bust?  With the dependencies on an
xml jar (and Scott is adding new dependencies) I always end up running it
from a java command line with the classpath set to my particular set of
jars.  So, seems like a wash to me.  I like the idea, but it doesn't seem to
work out.  Is there something I am missing here?

As for what gets moved into the sandbox, I vote for taking the current
chainsaw package and copying it into the sandbox.  Then it can get modified
in there (with Scott's changes, other changes, etc).  Once happy, we can
move it back.  I'm sure Oliver might have some thoughts here.

> The reason I'd like a bundled version is 
> that it may
> mean everyone can run it as easily as possible, and may give 
> us some more
> exposure for comments (which is what we really need).  

I don't see much difference.  Either we generate the jars separately or we
generate them together.  Either way, you have to generate them.  I think the
idea is that if the developer can build the sandbox projects, then they
should be able to generate the log4j-core as well.  Sandbox components are
not allowed to be "officially" released, but posting built versions of
sandbox code to the dev email list is probably ok with appropriately named
jars and disclaimers.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

View raw message