[jbosscache-dev] jboss-minimal.jar

[Bela Ban]

Couldn't that class be moved into the new common.jar that has been 
discussed on the core recently ?

Manik Surtani wrote:
> Whoops, no, it is needed for MarshalledValueOutputStreams
> -- 
> Manik Surtani
>
> Lead, JBoss Cache
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>
> Email: manik at jboss.org
> Telephone: +44 7786 702 706
> MSN: manik at surtani.org
> Yahoo/AIM/Skype: maniksurtani
>
>
> On 7 Sep 2006, at 15:47, Manik Surtani wrote:
>
>> Ok, another jar gone.  :-)
>> -- 
>> Manik Surtani
>>
>> Lead, JBoss Cache
>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>>
>> Email: manik at jboss.org
>> Telephone: +44 7786 702 706
>> MSN: manik at surtani.org
>> Yahoo/AIM/Skype: maniksurtani
>>
>>
>> On 7 Sep 2006, at 15:23, Brian Stansberry wrote:
>>
>>> jbosscache-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org wrote:
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> Am I correct to assume that the only reason we ship JBC with
>>>> jboss- minimal.jar is so we have access to
>>>> org.jboss.logging.XLevel?  And the purpose of logging.XLevel
>>>> is to give us TRACE level logging?
>>>>
>>>
>>> My gut instinct tells me it wasn't the original reason, but it looks
>>> like that's all that's left :)
>>>
>>> At least in 1.2.13 log4j now has its own TRACE level, and jdk logging
>>> has "FINE, FINER, FINEST" of which I'm sure commons-logging maps at
>>> least one or two to trace().  So I don't think it's worth it to ship 
>>> the
>>> jar just for that; just ship the latest log4j (we're shipping 1.2.8).
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbosscache-dev mailing list
>> jbosscache-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbosscache-dev mailing list
> jbosscache-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev
>

-- 
Bela Ban
Lead JGroups / Manager JBoss Clustering Group
JBoss - a division of Red Hat