Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-logging-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 44934 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2005 02:51:17 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Oct 2005 02:51:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 58304 invoked by uid 500); 18 Oct 2005 02:51:15 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-logging-general-archive@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 57711 invoked by uid 500); 18 Oct 2005 02:51:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@logging.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: "Logging General" List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list general@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 57507 invoked by uid 99); 18 Oct 2005 02:51:11 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:51:10 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [66.218.92.58] (HELO web40629.mail.yahoo.com) (66.218.92.58) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:48:33 -0700 Received: (qmail 65932 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Oct 2005 02:48:11 -0000 Message-ID: <20051018024811.65930.qmail@web40629.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [209.6.174.142] by web40629.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:48:11 PDT X-RocketYMMF: yoavs1 Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:48:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Yoav Shapira Reply-To: yoavs@apache.org Subject: Re: JULI proposal To: general@logging.apache.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi, Boris, thank you for writing this code, making the proposal, and raising relevant discussion issues. Please stick around and work with us log4j as well as JCL. But this specific proposal I don't really like. I see this proposal as causing more confusion than value-add. I don't like it with my Tomcat developer hat on, where we did exactly as much as we wanted to do in our JULI, and no more: this is definitely more. I don't like it with my log4j developer hat on, as it's bloat. I don't like it with my Jakarta Commons Logging hat, as it's yet another bridge leading to unnecessary user confusion. And I don't like it as a user because it doesn't add anything and only confuses me. I agree the CLA, license, and SLF4J dependence are all easy issues that can be dealt with. But they're side points to the above. Yoav Yoav Shapira System Design and Management Fellow MIT Sloan School of Management Cambridge, MA, USA yoavs@computer.org / www.yoavshapira.com