logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: Compiler configuration
Date Mon, 15 Aug 2011 14:14:35 GMT
I used a lot of what was in extras but I haven't looked at the other stuff.  If there is stuff
that warrants being brought forward I see no reason not to.

I think it makes sense for log4j 1.x and companions to be in synch.

Ralph

On Aug 15, 2011, at 6:59 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:

>> No matter what you do log4j looks really decaying. :-)   That is one reason I am
working on 2.0.  It targets 1.5 and actually makes use of features at that JDK level.
>> 
>> Log4j 1.x is getting almost no attention these days. I wouldn't recommend changing
the source and target levels. I can't speak to adding or removing UTF-8 as I'm not sure what
that means.
> 
> Am I right with my assumption that the companions will become obsolete
> with Log4j 2.0?
> If yes, I would like to change the companions configuration to the
> current log4j configuration
> 
> Cheers
> 
> 
>> 
>> Ralph
>> 
>> On Aug 15, 2011, at 3:57 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> 
>>> For log4j it is:
>>> <source>1.3</source>
>>> <target>1.1</target>
>>> 
>>> For companions component, receivers and extras:
>>> <source>1.4</source>
>>> <target>1.4</target>
>>> <encoding>UTF-8</encoding>
>>> 
>>> This is true for the maven  pom, but not for the build.xml which uses
>>> 1.2 and 1.1 (which is scary btw)
>>> 
>>> For the unreleased zeroconf:
>>> <source>1.2</source>
>>> <target>1.1</target>
>>> 
>>> Does it make sense to have different compiler configurations for add
>>> ons to the original log4j?
>>> 
>>> For sake of compatiblity, we can do the following:
>>> 
>>> #1: use 1.4 for all, including log4j. 1.3 is really ancient
>>> #2: use 1.5 for all, including log4j, because even 1.4 is long time dead
>>> #3: leave log4j as it is, use the same configuration for companions
>>> (and remove UTF-8)
>>> #4: do #4, but include UTf-8 to log4j build
>>> 
>>> To be honest, I am all for #2. I know, bc and such, but targeting for
>>> 1.1 makes log4j really look decaying. I would agree to #4, if #2 does
>>> not find friends.
>>> 
>>> Your thoughts?
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> Christian
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.grobmeier.de
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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


Mime
View raw message