avalon-phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Leo Simons" <leosim...@apache.org>
Subject RE: Statusable
Date Thu, 28 Mar 2002 20:36:32 GMT
I'm +1 but as this would break logger binary compatibility it
requires a new release of logger, and maybe also of excalibur/
framework (not exactly sure where the changes are neccessary?).

So we might still need to keep writing to System.out for now...
you volunteering to look into this? ;)

Also, did Pete ever reply to the question below? Pete? He is
king-of-the-logkit of course, so we need his infinite wisdom
on this :P


- Leo

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Paul Hammant [mailto:Paul_Hammant@yahoo.com]
> Verzonden: Thursday, March 28, 2002 9:05 PM
> Aan: Avalon-Phoenix Developers List
> Onderwerp: Re: Statusable
> I think this is worth re-opening.
> Reason?  Well we are about to have SAR files downloadable from the
> website and drop into an arbitary Phoneix.  In terms of the "five second
> test", it would be handy if the blocks could offer some advice after
> start().
> For example if a product uses Jo! it may want to say.
>     "HTTP Service mounted on port 8080"
> At the moment I find myself writing to System.out to help the newbie
> know what they should do after launching Phoenix with an app.  It would
> be nice if there were some controlled way of output such status info for
> a block.
> The original idea was to have Statusable [   setStatus(String msg)  ],
> but that was rightly shot down as there is much overlap with Logger.  If
> Logger were to have a new method for setting of status (or priority) and
> the status, as well as being output to the log target, were buffered by
> Phoenix for other use :
>   1) later retrieval by a management console, webapp or GUI.
>   2) after system startup, a once only outputting of statii to the
> console (for the newbie)
> Thoughts?
> - Paul
> >Hi,
> >
> >>Emperor is making the same point about similarities with Logging.  I am
> >>not so sure there is that overlap with the current Logger.class.
> >>
> >>If it had status(String st); as a method I might think it could do the
> >>job.  I am not sure how we would stand on that addition given the recent
> >>backwards-compatability flamewars ;-)
> >>
> >
> >How about extending the Priority by adding a STATUS level and do
> >logger.log(XXXPriority.STATUS, message)? True, Priority is final
> but I don't
> >see any reason why it is like that. Why would you use
> logger.log(..) method
> >then?
> >
> >Mircea
> >
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-phoenix-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-phoenix-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message