commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam R. B. Jack" <>
Subject Re: Starting work on UGLI
Date Mon, 07 Jun 2004 14:07:11 GMT
> I am CCing general@logging, avalon-dev and commons-dev to elicit input
> for this endeavor.

I'm no expert in this area, simply an external user (with no insights into
history/politics/whatever). That said, I'm not shy to provide my input...

I've loved logging (log4j, simple), I've hated logging (for becoming a
pain). I've never had good experiences with commons-logging in my
environments (not saying I could do better, I recognize the challenge is
non-trivial), but I accept it is currently a *necessary evil* given Javasoft
adding to the mix w/ JDK logging. Logging users just ought not suffer the

If UGLI is a way to bring /commons-logging/ into the fold of logging
services & provided as a globally available service, I could be +1 for that

That said, a few things:

1) I don't know the two communities, but one thing I like about C-L being in
'user space' is it is clearly a user advocate w/o the temptations to extend
the API. We see (from the recent Gump failures) how many folks depend upon
C-L already, but maybe putting it into a logging services community would
open it up to more folks, including container writers.

2) I know C-L has a hard life, it is trying to sit on top of so much, but I
find it's need/attempt to call/configure logging packages a problem. I don't
know if I am expressing some form of IOC thought here, but when working on
Depot, even C-L falls down. We (as a library) wanted to plug in to Ant, and
we didn't want to force the C-L to Ant bridge. Basically, we wrote our own
(yet another) logging that was simply a listener pattern, and plugged in an
Ant logger listener, or a commons logging listener, as appropriate. Works
nicely, but I don't want to write that code. I'd like UGLI as a logging
abstraction that all containers can agree upon (Ant as a container, an
application as a container) and have the environment provide it.

3) Forgive me, but ... would UGLI (with nose holding) be able to sit under
JDK logging? Surely folks ought be able to just use that. Ugly or not, the
JDK solution is going to be there inside any recent Java VM. Is that not
sufficiently simple?

Right now, logging is simple, but real-world logging has become way too
complex, in too many environments. Something needs to give.



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

View raw message