commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gülcü <c...@qos.ch>
Subject Re: [logging] ECL: Log interface vs. abstract class
Date Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:44:31 GMT
Henning,

Thank you for  sharing your mind.  You have the  right to pooh-pooh my
opinions as much I have the  right to express them.  I still happen to
think   that  the  X.25   TCP/IP  analogy   bears  relevance   to  the
discussion. The fact that a simple analogy was sufficient to push your
buttons should tell you something.

At 09:04 AM 12/21/2004, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
>Ceki =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=FClc=FC?= <ceki@qos.ch> writes:
>
> >all the attempts  made at bridging X.25 and  TCP/IP, both well defined
> >and  stable protocols,  have  failed miserably,  even  if both  stacks
> >supposedly fit into layers 1-4 of the 7 layer OSI network model.
>
>But X.25 and TCP/IP use two completely different paradigms ("always
>deliver" vs. "best effort"). BTDTGTT.
>
>This is like saying "a good football player should also be a good
>basketball player, because both are games played with a ball".
>
>If this is the level to which this discussion will degrade, it makes
>no sense to discuss. You are (once again) comparing apples to
>pears.
>
>         Regards
>                 Henning

-- 
Ceki Gülcü

   The complete log4j manual: http://qos.ch/log4j/



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