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: Bug List
Date Mon, 02 Aug 2004 09:37:57 GMT

For many if not all patches submitted, the invaluable part is the
logic driving the patch not the patch itself. The patch itself is of
course also valuable, but only as a facilitator helping to get the
point across.

In long run, the code itself has little value without the developers
willing and capable of maintaining it. Thus, added value of a patch is
far greater when it teaches the developer how to fish instead of
giving him/her a fish.

Obviously, in the case of truly trivial patches, the above analysis
does not apply.

Are you really talking about completely trivial patches? Blindly
applying patches can lead to unmaintainable code which no body
understands. (I'd of course like to avoid that...)

If you are talking about totally trivial patches, then a list of such
patches would be very handy. :-)

At 12:13 AM 8/2/2004, Paul Smith wrote:
>I would help out more quickly if the patches were in the Unified diff format
>(diff -u ).  I think some of the new ones are in Contextual diff format, and
>since my IDE (Eclipse) doesn't support that, I'm less motivated to go to the
>command line to apply the patch...
>
>However a definitive list on what should be "applyable" now would be useful.
>Thanks,
>Paul Smith
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jacob Kjome [mailto:hoju@visi.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 6:22 AM
> > To: Log4J Developers List; mprice@atl.lmco.com
> > Subject: Re: Bug List
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > I think this would definitely be valuable.  Please do it so we can cut
> > down on
> > the number of outstanding bug reports.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > Jake
> >
> > Quoting Michael Price <mprice@atl.lmco.com>:
> >
> > > I've noticed that several of the "Minor" bugs in the bug database for
> > > log4j have patches included inline or as attachments. Some of them are
> > > over a year old and the patches don't look like they have been applied
> > > yet. I've weeded out a few duplicate bug reports and included a few
> > > patches myself.
> > >
> > > Would it be helpful if I compiled a list of bug id's this weekend that
> > > include trivial patches which look correct? This way the developers
> > > with a commit bit could go through and commit them without having to
> > > take the time to wade through the bug database.
> > >
> > > I'd be happy to compile such a list if this would help.
> > >
> > > Michael Price
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

-- 
Ceki Gülcü

      For log4j documentation consider "The complete log4j manual"
      ISBN: 2970036908 http://www.qos.ch/shop/products/clm_t.jsp  



---------------------------------------------------------------------
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