ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Magesh Umasankar" <umag...@rediffmail.com>
Subject Re: [Vote] Logging
Date Wed, 09 May 2001 15:46:27 GMT
>>>What is the reason for building a facade?
>>>1. to reduce complexity
>>>2. to allow pluggability
>>>
>>>Ant does not need (2) in any shape or form. 
>>
>>Why?

>Exactly: Answer why we would need it.

Out there...
1. ...One Logging App may have a bigger market share 
      than another.
2. ...One Logging App may be smaller in size than 
      another.
3. ...One Logging App may provide more features than 
      another - something as simple as a Log Roller.
4. ...One Logging App may have better documentation than 
      another.
5. ...One Logging App may be faster than another.

>>
>>>I would also suggest that (1)
>>>is not needed if the underlying system is not complex. 
>>>When the complexity of the facade approaches complexity 
>>>of the underlying system then there is absolutely no 
>>>reason for a facade. As the facade you present is 
>>>roughly the same complexity as logkit I don't think you 
>>>can claim that the facade is for (1). 
>>
>>If the facade is just as complex as LogKit's User API, 
>>and it also provides pluggability, wouldn't it be 
>>preferred?

>because it adds complexity to ant code, because it 
>means theres more code
>that ant developers have to maintain, because it's bad 
>engineering ... 

>And as I said - we don't need pluggability.

Probably we don't need pluggability *yet*, which would 
make a valid case for not building a facade.  If building a facade is ruled out, getting back
to the original discussion, what features does LogKit have over Log4J, to make it more appealing
to Ant2, other than size?

Magesh

_____________________________________________________
Chat with your friends as soon as they come online. Get Rediff Bol at
http://bol.rediff.com





Mime
View raw message