logging-log4j-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gülcü <c...@qos.ch>
Subject RE: problems with chainsaw build
Date Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:53:40 GMT


The ExpressionFilter&LogFilePatternReceiver/ORO dependency is related
but quite distinct from the problem discovered by Curt. As I was
expecting a different approach, I was surprised and a little confused
by the changes in your latest commit to build.xml. Your changes are
certainly not intrusive from the perspective of the "log4j.jar"
target. However, I don't think it does justice to the o.a.l.rules
package. We should revisit the issue of adding the rules package to
log4j.jar and its ORO dependency at a later juncture, after things
calm down.

How does that sound to you?

At 05:20 PM 12/16/2004, Scott Deboy wrote:
>I'm -1 on reverting.
>The question is if the chainsaw jar target should be skipped if ORO is 
>ORO's presence is not -critical- in Chainsaw's case. If it were, I would 
>agree with the revert (I wouldn't have made the commit).
>If the ORO jar is not available when Chainsaw is running (and now 
>compiling the target, after last night's commit), everything works fine - 
>the only feature missing is the 'LIKE' rule in expressions.
>Again, the expression syntax and rule package were designed to provide 
>functionality in Chainsaw, but are useful outside of Chainsaw 
>I can't see a reason why folks wouldn't want to download ORO and use it, 
>but the lack of ORO support will not prevent Chainsaw from working.
>My most recent commit to LogFactory also allows folks to write their own 
>LikeRule using JDK1.4's java.util.regex package if they wanted.

Ceki Gülcü

   The complete log4j manual: http://qos.ch/log4j/

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

View raw message