Mailing-List: contact log4j-user-help@logging.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Log4J Users List" <log4j-user@logging.apache.org>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 15:34:28 +0200 (CEST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Endre_St=F8lsvik?= <Endre@Stolsvik.com>
To: Log4J Users List <log4j-user@logging.apache.org>
Subject: RE: An odd configuration need...
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040503144432.03120d50@mail.qos.ch>
Message-ID: 
 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405031507591.1676-100000@excalibur.intra.coretrek.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT

On Mon, 3 May 2004, Ceki G�lc� wrote:

| At 10:32 AM 5/3/2004, you wrote:
| >On Sat, 1 May 2004, Ceki G�lc� wrote:
| >
| >| I am aware of the fact that this may be frustrating, especially if the
| >| chainsaw part is nearing readiness for prime time. I'd like to finish
| >| work on DBAppedner (3-4 days) and Joran (2-3 days) before releasing
| >| 1.3 alpha.
| >
| >Frustrating? Hell yes: TRACE level!!
|
| You perpetual whining does not help project move forward. Please stop.

Did you read the rest of my mail, or did you just blank out after this
one line?

About the trace-mentioning up here: it wasn't really meant for anything
but pointing out that "yes, there are features there that could do with a
1.3 release sooner than later". I'm slightly weirded out with your
totalitarian, dictatorian, angry handling of the trace issue.
  I've submitted the patch - you said that the vote regarding the issue
went in favor of adding the feature - why haven't there been any moves
regarding the patch, at all, then?

E.


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