commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Donnie Hale" <don...@haleonline.net>
Subject RE: (Logging)[Proposal] A little refactoring
Date Fri, 21 Dec 2001 01:20:34 GMT
I've seen a lot of logging discussions going on recently. I'm a little late
to the game here, but can I ask where it is that log4j falls short to just
use directly? We have a very large web/ejb app that uses log4j's native API,
and it's been working perfectly for us for the better part of a year.

Just curious...

Donnie


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paulo Gaspar [mailto:paulo.gaspar@krankikom.de]
> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 6:24 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: RE: (Logging)[Proposal] A little refactoring
>
>
> That was THE reason why I adopted Avalon new wrappers instead. I ported
> them out of Avalon and they work just fine. There are NO dependencies
> from the rest of the framework except for a formatter that can be
> dropped.
>
> I also improved (IMHO) an existing AbstractLoggable class and I am now
> porting an XML based configurator for LogKit from Avalon Excalibur. This
> one has more dependencies but it is ok.
>
> Next I will adapt the simple property configuration code for LogKit and
> Log4J used at Velocity, (will looking at Turbine too).
>
> So, this set includes:
>  - Wrappers for Log4J, LogKit and the JDK 1.4 Logging API;
>  - Really simple internal logger + NoOp logger;
>  - Log4J has its own XML configuration and LogKit gets one;
>  - Ability to use a hierarchy of loggers in an API independent way.
>    Only the configuration is API dependent.
>
> Will soon (next week) include simple property configuration.
>
> Still no plans on evolving the JDK 1.4 Logging API.
>
>
> This is the best logging code I found around Jakarta. It just picked
> it from several projects and would like to see it together in the
> Commons where it would have a wider use. And it is working fine
> across a 500 class and 75 Kloc piece of code.
>
> My interest is to keep the functionality I have now without being
> alone taking care of it. (Trying to cut on the above numbers.)
> =:o)
>
>
> If there is interest I can put it a "commons" package and post it
> tomorrow.
>
>
> Have fun,
> Paulo Gaspar
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: robert burrell donkin [mailto:robertdonkin@mac.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 11:20 PM
> > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> > Subject: (Logging)[Proposal] A little refactoring
> >
> >
> > i've been adding logging (using commons-logging) into betwixt and found
> > that commons-logging is a little bit broken. rather than fix the
> > symptom -
> > that the log level constants were altered a little and that broke
> > a lot of
> > code - i'd prefer to refactor by introducing an abstract implementation
> > Log that handles the log level logic (ie. stops calls going to the
> > implementation implementation) and make the existing implementations
> > inherit. hopefully this would stop logging breaking like that again.
> >
> > i'm willing to code these changes if this plan's acceptable.
> >
> > - robert
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>



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


Mime
View raw message