commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From robert burrell donkin <robertburrelldon...@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject Re: [logging] new simple logging component?
Date Sun, 19 Feb 2006 08:59:46 GMT
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 10:45 +1300, Simon Kitching wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 21:33 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 10:05 +1300, Simon Kitching wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 16:14 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> > > > i've been considering for a while whether the commons should ship a
> > > > simpler but reasonably compatible version of JCL. over the years, we've
> > > > recommended this so many times but have always left it to the actual
> > > > user to go away and do the work themselves. i've come to the conclusion
> > > > that it would be a good idea for this to be available as a separate
> > > > component.
> > > 
> > > I'm ok with this idea. It certainly would be useful.
> > > 
> > > However I think that JCL2.0 won't be too hard to create, and we would of
> > > course end up generating exactly this as part of JCL2.0. So I would
> > > probably prefer to just leave this work until then, rather than delay
> > > the 1.1 release. If someone (you?) really wants to work on this, then
> > > perhaps that could be done as a 1.1.1 release?
> > 
> > i was thinking about a completely separate commons component with an
> > independent lifecycle. 
> 
> Well, this component would become obsolete as soon as JCL2.0 was
> released. Also seems confusing for two commons components to offer
> classes with the same names.

that's true enough

> If it's to be a temporary thing only, then perhaps a sourceforge project
> would be a better home for this?

depends on what you mean by temporary :)

given the vast number of containers, applications and frameworks that
use JCL, it may take several years before JCL 1.x is replaced in even a
simple majority of installations. so, this component would need to be
made available for at least as long as JCL is in common usage. 

there are also political reasons why it might be better to host the
component here. many companies have misguided policies which make it
easy to use apache components but difficult for those hosted offshore. 

since we're going to need to provide support for JCL 1.x for a number of
years ahead, it would probably make sense to move JCL 1.x into a legacy
section once JCL 2.0 is ready. we could move this component there at the
same time.

- robert


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