logging-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Harry Hartley" <hhart...@pobox.com>
Subject Is Log4J Dead on the Java Platform?
Date Wed, 18 May 2005 09:48:23 GMT
I would like to assess where things really stand with Log4J before
committing more of my project code to the log4j framework.


I am an old time C and C++ developer, but fairly new to the java open
source. It has taken some time, but I have figured out pretty much
everything I feel I need to know to complete my web application. I have
learned how to effectively use: Ant, Struts, Basic Tomcat Configuration,
JSP's and Servlets, MySQL, ConnectorJ, Cascading Stylesheets, Log4J,
server/context/web.xml files, blah, blah, and blah.


As you can imagine it has been a process not without some frustration.
Documentation ranges from obscure/poor to pretty good. I have become used to
persisting where it seems as though there is NOTHING that documents how
things work, but eventually I figure it out through surfing the web, or
looking at source code.


During the last couple of years while away from coding, all the java coders
would tell me how great and simple log4j is. Thus I decided to use it in my
current project. Again, my typical learning curve before I have any useful


Which brings me to my question/observation:

1)       The documentation for Log4J is pitiful. I have not purcha$ed the
'full' manual, and will not. Maybe its as simple as that.

2)       The download seems very incomplete. There are MANY directories that
are empty. The various examples directories are incomplete.

3)       There are references to classes in the documentation that do not
exist. Specifically XMLSocketAppender.

4)       Since early this year, log4j mailing lists are essentially silent.


There seems to be more functionality in log4cxx. Is log4cxx the flagship and
log4j the follower?


Java  based Chainsaw has several receivers that are not supported by
appenders under log4j? Again, specifically XMLSocketAppender.


The 'full' manual is for a fee, is this standard practice under apache? This
is the first time I've seen this under the apache initiative.


I notice that tomcat itself seems to opt for a default of java.util.logging
and support log4j as a compatibility issue. Is this accurate?


My title begs the question, is log4J essentially dead?


Or maybe I should ask a slightly different question. What is the best
logging package to use with tomcat?






View raw message