Question about log simplification via radcan



Hi!  Here is a question from
http://sourceforge.net/p/maxima/bugs/2341/(thanks, Mike O.!) which
hadn't gotten attention yet, but I'm just curious
about, so I'm posting it.  Is this a "wontfix" because of radcan's behavior
as symbols, not functions, or is there a real bug here?  Obviously output 6
is log(2) for some values of log, but that's not what I'm getting at;
presumably log(2) here means the usual thing.  Thanks!

(%i1) display2d: false;

(%o1) false
(%i2) domain: complex;

(%o2) complex
(%i3) declare(t, real);

(%o3) done
(%i4) f(t) := log(2*t) + log(1/t);

(%o4) f(t):=log(1/t)+log(2*t)
(%i5) radcan(f(t));

(%o5) log(2)
(%i6) radcan(f(-1));

(%o6) log(-1)+log(-2)