Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 98593 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2003 13:46:45 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 28 Aug 2003 13:46:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 57759 invoked by uid 500); 28 Aug 2003 13:44:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 57649 invoked by uid 500); 28 Aug 2003 13:44:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 57519 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2003 13:44:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO f1.internuscorp.com) (211.24.132.29) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 28 Aug 2003 13:44:44 -0000 Received: from hedhman.org (f1.internuscorp.com [211.24.132.29]) by f1.internuscorp.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id h7SE3EcP005227 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 22:03:15 +0800 From: Niclas Hedhman Received: from 202.146.68.13 (SquirrelMail authenticated user niclas) by www.hedhman.org with HTTP; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 22:03:15 +0800 (MYT) Message-ID: <3239.202.146.68.13.1062079395.squirrel@www.hedhman.org> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 22:03:15 +0800 (MYT) Subject: Re: Porting Cocoon Logging to Log4j - Proposal and Discussion To: In-Reply-To: <3F4E05FC.5070800@apache.org> References: <3F4DFEBE.3060400@apache.org> <3204.202.146.68.13.1062078477.squirrel@www.hedhman.org> <3F4E05FC.5070800@apache.org> X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.8) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Berin Loritsch said: > Niclas Hedhman wrote: >> Well, Robert's assertion is ambigious. Does he say; >> >> Drop >> void enableLogging( Logger logger ); >> >> and let every component do, >> >> logger = Logger.getLogger( this.getClass().getLogger() ); >> >> OR, >> >> "Let Log4J be the default logger backend, and have the Log4J >> configuration handily available." >> >> >> I think Berin is -1 on the first, but more receptible to the >> latter. > > I am very -1 for the first. > I am pretty +1 for the latter. Then the question to the community would be; "Should Cocoon be configured out-of-the-box for logging to a Log4J backend?" I am in strong favour of this too, although I have no official say in it... Niclas