Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jak-commons-dev@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.12 as permitted sender)
To: dev@commons.apache.org
From: =?UTF-8?B?SsO2cmc=?= Schaible <joerg.schaible@scalaris.com>
Subject: Re: [discovery] org.apache.commons.discovery.log?!?
Followup-To: gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 12:09:04 +0200
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <inepo0$3k4$3@dough.gmane.org>
References: <BANLkTi==x7SeNpYBPf=HKjdaA-1qPW1dFg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit
User-Agent: KNode/4.4.9

Simone Tripodi wrote:

> Hi all guys,
> since I'm in the middle of the process of [discovery] review, I'd like
> to discuss a little about the 'log' package[1]: It is a
> commons-logging implementation wrapper that I don't understand the
> reason why it has be implemented :(
> Moreover the 90% of classes that use a Log instance, have a static
> setter method...
> 
> I'd tend to remove that package and use commons-logging in the
> traditional way, WDYT?

IIRC discovery was also used as a jar ca be put into lib/endorsed. Having 
references there to commons-logging (or slf4j) would be fatal.

- Jörg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org