commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig R. McClanahan" <craig...@apache.org>
Subject RE: [logging] commons-logging and log4.configuration
Date Thu, 27 Mar 2003 18:07:53 GMT


On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, SPRINGER,IAN (HP-NewJersey,ex1) wrote:

> Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:58:48 -0800
> From: "SPRINGER,IAN (HP-NewJersey,ex1)" <ian_springer@hp.com>
> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List' <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> Cc: "MAZZITELLI,JOHN (HP-NewJersey,ex2)" <mazz@hp.com>,
>      "CAMPANA,SAL (HP-Philadelphia,ex1)" <sal.campana@hp.com>
> Subject: RE: [logging] commons-logging and log4.configuration
>
> | > I don't think you want to make commons-logging.properties contain
> | > impl-specific config properties. Some impls might not even
> | use a properties
> | > file for their configuration - they might use XML or some
> | other format.
> | Well it might be nice to be able to specify the location of a config
> | file e.g. org.apache.commons.logging.config=logging.properties
> |
> | It would be up to the impls then to interpret this as they see fit.
>
>
> That would work. So you could either set the impl config file location via
> the
> property in commons-logging.properties, or by calling the
> LogFactoryImpl.configure( String ) method I proposed.
>
> | > One other idea is to define a new Common-Logging config file format.
> | > LogFactory concrete impls would then map the Common-Logging
> | format to their
> | > own config format in order to initialize.
> | Nice idea.  The same format would work across multiple impls.  Would
> | this be able to define all of the features of arbitrary impls?  This
> | would have the potential to either become too restrictive or too
> | complex.
>
>
> >From reading the Commons Logging docs, I think one of the goals of the
> project is to support a subset of functionality that is likely to be
> supported by any logging implementation - just like any abstration layer
> should - ie, JAXP doesn't support all the nifty Xerces features, because
> they're not all fundamental enough.
>

More specifically, commons-logging explicitly declares configuration of
the underlying logging implementation to be out of scope.

> --Ian
>

Craig

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


Mime
View raw message