commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luc Maisonobe <>
Subject Re: [exec] How to support the various Logging APIs?!
Date Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:06:41 GMT
Siegfried Goeschl wrote:

> Because using commons-logging is not undisputed and log4j/jdk logging 
> would reduce the number of dependencies for a user

I agree. Lots of debate have already occured on this subject, and no 
consensus reached. This simply shows this is a matter of taste, and 
probably even passion. So there is no point in pushing one choice among 
the users. I do have a favorite library too, but will neither say what 
it is nor try to provide any argument for it.

Removing a dependency is always a good thing for a library that is 
intended to be a building bloc for some higher level application.

Torsten Curd wrote:

 > And I would argue that a library should be so robust that (at
 > least preferably) it does not need any logging at all ...or if there
 > is a problem you just debug it.

I also agree. Commons are quite low level components, they should be as 
lighweight as possible. They should neither impose some framework to 
work nor make any assumption on how they will be used. They should be 
robust and simple enough to not need logging *inside* themselves.


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

View raw message