commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David Graham" <dgraham1...@hotmail.com>
Subject Re: [logging] Moving Towards A 1.0.3 Release
Date Mon, 31 Mar 2003 00:52:27 GMT
>Folks,
>
>A lot of people are interested in an updated release of commons-logging
>that incorporates post-1.0.2 bugfixes.  In order to do so, we need to
>address the following outstanding bug reports -- I've described my own
>recommendations on dealing with them in indented paragraphs marked
>"CRM>>>" -- we need to come to consensus on the actions to take and them
>implement them in order to reach a 1.0.3 release quickly:
>
>
>13201 Remove default log4j configuration
>
>       CRM>>> I agree.  The code in Log4JLogger.initialize() violates
>       the basic scope of commons-logging, which states  "The basic
>       principle is that the user is totally responsible for the
>       configuration of the underlying logging system.  Commons-logging
>       whould not change the existing configuration."  As an alternative
>       to the application explicitly configuring things, logging
>       implementations should provide auto-configuration mechanisms
>       (for Log4J, that means recognizing the existence of the
>       "log4j.properties" resource and using it.)
>
>       Similar code exists in the deprecated Log4JCategoryLogger class,
>       and should be removed from there as well.
>
>

+1

>16880 Language specs violation in Commons Logging 1.0.2 in class
>       LogFactoryImpl
>
>       CRM>>> I haven't investigated this one yet, but we'll want to
>       make sure we do not introduce any security-related vulnerabilities
>       in dealing with it.
>
>
>17561 LogFactoryImpl.guessConfig overrides configuration
>
>       CRM>>> As the bug report points out, we currently mess up the
>       Log4J configuration even if you explicitly select SimpleLog.
>       Dealing with 13201 will fix part of that; as a further step I
>       would like to deprecate Log4jFactory and the way that it is
>       created as a proxy for the standard LogFactoryImpl.  It seems
>       to add zero value, and only obfuscates the code -- anything
>       specific that we need should be possible in the base class.
>       I'd like to see Log4jFactory removed in 1.1, because
>       LogFactoryImpl should be capable of doing everything.
>

+1

>17894 Unable to configure commons-logging SimpleLog for a webapp
>
>       Other than the part about getting the manifest created
>       correctly (which I've fixed), this *appears* to be a duplicate
>       of 17561.
>

+1

>What do you guys think on these issues?

Thanks for your work on logging Craig.

>Craig

Dave

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


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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