Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 28799 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2004 13:27:05 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Jun 2004 13:27:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 52238 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jun 2004 13:27:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 52159 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jun 2004 13:27:01 -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 52140 invoked by uid 99); 7 Jun 2004 13:27:01 -0000 Received: from [205.160.101.145] (HELO hqexch01.upstate.com) (205.160.101.145) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Jun 2004 06:27:01 -0700 Received: from IQUITOS (therman01.waltham.upstate.com [172.17.1.102]) by hqexch01.upstate.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id J9LR3F41; Mon, 7 Jun 2004 09:29:29 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Eric Pugh" To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Subject: RE: Starting work on UGLI Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 15:26:46 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 In-Reply-To: <40C41FFF.1040108@apache.org> X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N How is UGLI different from commons-logging? I don't want yet another logging api to have to consider when writing my applications/components. I definitly don't want to have to implement another logging interface, and after all the pain I've gone through attempting to grok various logging packages, I often find myself going back to System.out.println and System.err.println since I know they work. Or, spinning my own logging package that does exactly what I need and no more. Not a great solution, but a reaction to the complexity of what I think should be really be a very simple (from the developer perspective) problem to solve. Any thing that makes logging simple would be great. Eric > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:mcconnell@apache.org] > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 9:58 AM > To: Avalon Developers List > Cc: log4j-dev@logging.apache.org; general@logging.apache.org; > commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org > Subject: Re: Starting work on UGLI > > > > Ceki: > > Ceki G�lc� wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > While working on the internal log4j logging, it occurred to me that it > > could be very useful to synthesize log4j's core user interface in its > > own package. I'd like to call this package Universal Generic Logging > > Interface or UGLI (pun intended). > > > > The word "universal" stands for applicability in all contexts, > > including stand alone applications, containers (EJB, Servlet, Nano, > > Pico, Avalon, whatever) and most importantly in specialized > > libraries. The word generic stands for very simple, with an absolute > > separation between the logging interface required to access logging on > > one hand and configuration of the logging system on the other. > > Sounds good. > > I'm presuming that the phrase "logging interface required to access > logging" is specifically the client interface against which a logging > message is invoked (as opposed to anything related to how an instance of > that interface is created). Is that correct? > > The second phrase "configuration of the logging system" is somewhat > broader and I wanted to find out if your thinking about the general area > of how plug-in logging targets can be managed in a managed classloader > environment. This subject is currently the major obstacle to the use of > different logging solutions and a common API for loading, deploying and > releasing plug-in target factories would be a big step forward. > > For reference - Avalon's work in this area is under the Avalon Logging > system which is a implementation independent framework for managing a > logging system within which we have two plug-in implementation > > * LogKit > * Log4J. > > http://avalon.apache.org/logging/impl/index.html > > The actual logging management API is described in the javadoc at > http://avalon.apache.org/logging/api/index.html (however keep in mind > that each plug-in logging solution has its own particular logging system > configuration). > > As far as the management side is concerned, do you see UGLI covering the > spectrum of management APIs and configuration schema (or maybe I'm > reading too much into your email)? > > Cheers, Stephen. > > -- > > |---------------------------------------| > | Magic by Merlin | > | Production by Avalon | > | | > | http://avalon.apache.org | > |---------------------------------------| > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org