cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Antonio Gallardo" <>
Subject Re: Logkit jvadocs
Date Wed, 01 Jun 2005 11:20:30 GMT
On Mie, 1 de Junio de 2005, 2:00, Ralph Goers dijo:
> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>>On Mar, 31 de Mayo de 2005, 14:05, Vadim Gritsenko dijo:
>>>>>Is time to moving setup log4j as our default logging package.
>>>>>Is that OK?
> I'm also -1.  I might consider replacing logkit with UGLI, but not LOG4J
> directly. However, (a) UGLI is part of LOG4J 1.3 which is still alpha,
> (b) an analysis needs to be done to determine how UGLI performs compared
> to logkit, and (c) it needs to be determined if there will be any
> deployment problems (i.e what if Weblogic/JBoss/Websphere ships its own
> UGLI jar and requires that it be used).

It's ok, perhaps the new default logger should not be log4j. I don't know.
But AFAIK, log4j is the defacto standard. This is why I suggested it.

>>Can you explain your reasons? Is better to stay when the porject is then
>>and even on the internet is not javadocs site to point from our docs?
> 1. logkit isn't exactly dead. It doesn't seem like it has any known
> problems and it does what it was designed to do.

Maybe the project is not dead. Perhaps in process. Nobody replies on the
mail lists. There are no published javadocs. Nobody replies when or where
the javadocs are, well to me this signs the project is going to die. Dunno
how much months, I really don't care. I care more about cocoon and my
concerns are about the future of our logging system.

> Your statement implies
> that once a project matures and fulfills its purpose that it should then
> be abandoned because no new development is being done. That doesn't make
> sense.

IMHO, your logic in this case seems to be not correct to me.

For the records: Yes, this does not make sense. I agree.

We are using other projects that are not too much dynamic. They are
matured and his development almost stall. Can you point a mail where I am
raising concerns about them?

> 2. If there was a large concern, Cocoon could certainly fork its own
> copy of logkit.  I see no need for this though.

A posibility, but is our bussiness to care about logging? AFAIK, not. We
are gluing what we think is good for cocoon.

This was mostly a HEADS-UP. I wanted to share the current state of LogKit
+ his community and his support.

>>Seems like the Logkit situation is going worse with time. Until when we
>>will stay tied to this dead project?
> How is it getting worse?

No published javadocs. Lack of support. I know our current javadocs points
no where for avalon. I already fixed this.

>>>>haven't we already discussed this several times and always decided not
>>>>to change it?
>>Well, I think it is time to discuss again.
> -1. Nothing has changed.

Why do you think so?

Best Regards,

Antonio Gallardo.

View raw message