logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gülcü <c...@qos.ch>
Subject Re: Fwd: failure notice
Date Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:47:39 GMT


If we had Microsoft's resources, then we'd follow your advice. But we are 
not Microsoft. It's a simple question of resource allocation.

As a user you can either blow this incident out of proportion or accept it 
as a minor backward compatibility break which can be easily fixed when 
log4j 1.3 is released. However, cognizant of the delicate situation, we 
make no noises or announcements about any of the alpha releases of 1.3.

At 02:49 PM 11/30/2004, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>Gump is just a fuzzy user ;o)
>So irregardless of that, how come this mainly incompatible change is being
>made in a .x release?
>Wouldn't it be so much better to keep the old RFA still in there with a
>massive deprecated sign (possibly in the outputs as well), for one cycle?
>Even better if the older one delegates to the newer one, but that is less
>As the HEAD now is, you are asking an enormous amount of people to make
>changes if they want to upgrade to a newer version, which on paper (if anyone
>ever believes the Dewey convention) says it is a compatible upgrade with more
>But, then again, I am perhaps too sensitive and lazy, to see the beauty of
>culling the class without warning.
>    +------//-------------------+
>   / http://www.dpml.net       /
>  / http://niclas.hedhman.org /
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

Ceki Gülcü

  The complete log4j manual:  http://qos.ch/eclm
  Professional log4j support: http://qos.ch/log4jSupport  

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

View raw message