Antoon Pardon wrote:
> On 03/19/2015 10:35 AM, martin.spa...@gmail.com wrote:
>> The following code is challenging my sanity, in my understanding of the
>> documentation this should pass, given that getLogger is supposed to
>> return the root logger and the root logger should be called 'root'.
>
On 03/19/2015 10:35 AM, martin.spa...@gmail.com wrote:
> The following code is challenging my sanity, in my understanding of the
> documentation this should pass, given that getLogger is supposed to return
> the root logger and the root logger should be called 'root'.
Where do you get the idea t
