incubator-yoko-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <d...@iq80.com>
Subject Re: coding standard and logging
Date Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:40:10 GMT
I'm not saying this is the exact interface we want to use, but a good  
example of a log interface I found easy to integrate into Geronimo.

http://mx4j.sourceforge.net/docs/api/mx4j/log/Log.html

-dain

On Apr 6, 2006, at 12:31 PM, Sakala, Adinarayana wrote:

> Dain, can you give a pointer to some doco on own logging interface  
> that mx4j project did?
>
> thanks,
> adi
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dain Sundstrom [mailto:dain@iq80.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 2:31 PM
>> To: yoko-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: coding standard and logging
>>
>>
>> I would like to restate my suggestion that YOKO simply develop their
>> own logging interface like the mx4j project did.  This makes it very
>> easy to adapt to any solution.
>>
>> -dain
>>
>> On Apr 6, 2006, at 8:19 AM, Nolan, Edell wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:list@toolazydogs.com]
>>> Sent: 06 April 2006 16:07
>>> To: yoko-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: coding standard and logging
>>>
>>> Lars Kühne wrote, On 4/5/2006 9:30 PM:
>>>
>>>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lars Kühne wrote, On 4/4/2006 4:05 PM:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Nolan, Edell wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) The last email for the logging - is below We could use the
>>>>>>> LogUtils class from celtix which is using the
>>>>>>> jdk1.5 logging.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think there was strong opposition against JDK logging because
>>>>>> people love log4j. I think the consensus was to define our own
>>>>>> logger interface and inject that in ORB.init().
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What are our target JDK versions again?  Do we start w/ JDK14 or
>>>>> JDK13?  I am of the opinion that we use the vanilla
>> logger for JDK14
>>>>> or, if we start w/ JDK13, log4j.  In either case I do not see the
>>>>> need for a specialized logger interface that's injected; I'm
>>>>> interested in hearing opinion on this.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> JDK 1.3 will be end-of-lifed by Sun this summer, so I
>> think we should
>>>> ignore it.
>>>>
>>>> Re logging, where I work we use log4j on JDK 1.4. I think that is a
>>>> pretty common scenario, and using vanilla j.u.logging will not
>>>> integrate well with the rest of our apps. If you want to
>> support both
>>>> you either have to use some logger abstraction, and a logger
>>>> interface
>>>> is the best abstraction I can come up with.
>>>
>>> Makes sense.  What about slf4j?
>>>
>>>> Re minimum JDK: I would like to also bring JDK 1.5 into
>> the picture,
>>>> but maybe that should go into another thread.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, if our minimum JDK is 1.4 then I assume that we would work
>>> under JDK1.5; er, at least if you don't use Geronimo as an
>>> example.  :)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alan.
>>>
>>> I seen on the geronimo dev list
>>>
>>> "We already support JDK 1.5 except for CORBA.  Because of
>> the CORBA
>>> limitation Geronimo can't be certified on JDK 1.5, but if
>> you leave
>>> CORBA disabled (and turn off the DayTrader sample application)
>>> Geronimo should run fine on 1.5.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>     Aaron
>>> "
>>>
>>> My vote is to start with jdk1.5 and it seems geronimo already has
>>> support for jdk1.5.
>>>
>>> Edell.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>


Mime
View raw message