Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
From: Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org>
To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [apacheds] Which logging framework?
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 12:56:21 +0800
User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2
References: <768dcb2e05062717261892f89c@mail.gmail.com>
 <F7931194-97F1-4340-A60C-3D08F377E8A4@pegacat.com>
 <800df63905062718565024be6b@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <800df63905062718565024be6b@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200506281256.21756.niclas@hedhman.org>

On Tuesday 28 June 2005 09:56, Marc Boorshtein wrote:
> doesn't commons logging do just that? =A0let you easily migrate between
> log4j & built in logging?

Jakarta Commons-Logging has many issues related to its dynamic=20
lookup/resolution of the logging system to use.

Ceki G=FClc=FC has an article that covers this in great detail, and at the =
end=20
talks of static binding being the solution. Not sure if JCL has gone this=20
route for the new upcoming release, but I think not, and that there are a=20
huge gap between JCL's notion of what works, and the emperically collected=
=20
use-cases that doesn't.

Ceki has released Simple Logging Facade 4 Java, SLF4J, which is basically a=
n=20
API without the implementation and that you statically bind that API to the=
=20
implementation in a Jar file. I.e. it works for all conceived use-cases.


See Ceki's article at; http://www.qos.ch/logging/classloader.jsp

Another interesting read is; http://www.qos.ch/logging/thinkAgain.jsp


Cheers
Niclas