commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Costin Manolache <>
Subject Re: [logging] To depend or not to depend?
Date Mon, 10 Feb 2003 20:02:05 GMT
James Strachan wrote:

> Maybe using introspection on the Log implementation might be easier to add
> incrementally to Log implementations without breaking backwards
> compatibility.

Introspection or JMX ( which is the other name for introspection :-).

Each LogFactory or Log can support a lot of features in a backward
compatible way by using JMX. There is absolutely no reason to change the
Log interface - it does what it should do. Adding another interface may be
a solution - but I don't think it is needed in most cases - and certainly
not for management operations.


>> Adding a new method might be OK in a 2.x release (although I don't feel a
>> particular compulsion towards it), but would be against the spirit of
>> Commons support for backwards compatibility in a 1.x releaese; so I'd
>> definitely be -1 there.
> So you might not be -1 if if it were a 2.x release change?
> James
> -------
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts

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

View raw message