Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 45498 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2004 21:11:54 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 21 Jun 2004 21:11:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 4724 invoked by uid 500); 21 Jun 2004 21:12:06 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 4667 invoked by uid 500); 21 Jun 2004 21:12:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 4615 invoked by uid 99); 21 Jun 2004 21:12:02 -0000 Received: from [195.188.213.9] (HELO smtp-out6.blueyonder.co.uk) (195.188.213.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 21 Jun 2004 14:12:02 -0700 Received: from [10.0.0.2] ([82.38.65.173]) by smtp-out6.blueyonder.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 21 Jun 2004 22:11:38 +0100 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618) In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <91B04ACC-C3C7-11D8-914C-003065DC754C@blueyonder.co.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: robert burrell donkin Subject: Re: [logging] after 1.0.4: unfinished business Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 22:11:31 +0100 To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.618) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Jun 2004 21:11:38.0835 (UTC) FILETIME=[57A54A30:01C457D4] X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On 21 Jun 2004, at 21:47, Gary Gregory wrote: > [snip] >> memory log >> ---------- >> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27663 >> >> i quite like this idea but it's not really a major feature. i'm >> inclined to try to keep the core jar small by creating another > optional >> jar called loggers containing loggers which are less likely to be > used. >> the distribution would contain both jars. maybe avalon log could be >> moved there too. > [snip] > > From our product's POV, I've always used CL as a thin wrapper to log4j > with the remote possibility that we will switch to JDK 1.4 logging when > we move from Java 1.3 to 1.4. > > I have no pb with useful stuff being the jar but it sounds like some of > these are new features that are not in the "wrapper" dept, which argues > to me for putting it in a separate jar. > > Then there are questions like: should the "memory log" really be in CL > as opposed to logj4? that's a good question :) the binary distribution is now quite large (due to the improved, mavenized documentation). so, as long as the actual core jar stays small, i'm a lot happier adding new loggers to an optional jar if there's a good chance that people would find them useful but i'd be interested to hear other people's opinions on this one... - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org