Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 54440 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2005 22:33:08 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Oct 2005 22:33:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 60304 invoked by uid 500); 11 Oct 2005 22:33:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 60249 invoked by uid 500); 11 Oct 2005 22:33:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 60238 invoked by uid 99); 11 Oct 2005 22:33:07 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:33:07 -0700 Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [66.112.202.2] (HELO mail.devtech.com) (66.112.202.2) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:33:10 -0700 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.devtech.com (JAMES SMTP Server 3.0-dev) with SMTP ID 547 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 18:32:45 -0400 (EDT) From: "Noel J. Bergman" To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Subject: RE: upgrading to nlog4j.1.2.17 Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 18:32:42 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <1129068125.13190.51.camel@wkslx01.iktek.com> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Importance: Normal X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > I just want to add three points : > - first, excuse my english No worries. :-) > second, I really understand Nick point, and I really think it should > be addressed, but I'm just not sure that it's the right pace to do it. As one of the projects that would like to embed it, I might have a different priority, but that's a separate discussion, and far more involved. > third, [I] I don't want him to think that we think that log4j > is a pile of bok... It isn't. But the discussion of which API should be used to access logging is separable from that of how logging is implemented. --- Noel