logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacob Kjome <h...@visi.com>
Subject Re: Improving Log4J concurrency, avoiding deadlock
Date Fri, 24 Sep 2004 05:04:17 GMT
At 04:08 PM 9/23/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>--- Elias Ross <eross@m-qube.com> wrote:
> > I feel a bit frustrated because I've been bitten in the ass a few
> > times encountering this "contrived" problem and I haven't been
> > taken very seriously pointing this out.  As I have tried to explain,
> > this is something that has happened before on servers at this
> > company, and it's something we'd like to have fixed.
>
>Last time I checked log4j was open source.

Last time I checked, it seemed he realized this, so I'm not sure why you 
see the need to point this out.

>  Fix your version and be done
>with it. The official distribution will be "fixed" when an appropriate
>"fix" is determined. What is hard to understand about that?

He's taken the time to look at the source and provided the project with 
patches that he finds reasonable and claims are backward compatible.  He's 
also trying to argue his case about why they should be included in the 
Log4j distribution.  Anyone working with open source understands that they 
could fork the code and add whatever they want without it being accepted by 
the project.  There is an obvious reason to avoid this, however; extra 
maintenance and having to keep the fork synchronized with continuing changes.

Bottom line: please don't discourage people who are actively contributing, 
especially when you are making an irrelevant point obvious to anyone on 
this list.


Jake 


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


Mime
View raw message