Mailing-List: contact log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Log4J Developers List" <log4j-dev@logging.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Message-Id: <6.0.3.0.0.20050324174335.0420cbd8@torino>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 17:55:36 +0100
To: "Log4J Developers List" <log4j-dev@logging.apache.org>,
	"'Log4J Developers List'" <log4j-dev@logging.apache.org>
From: Ceki =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=FClc=FC?= <ceki@qos.ch>
Subject: RE: JDJ - log4j vs java.util.logging
In-Reply-To: <200503241625.j2OGPM0Z010999@outgoing.mit.edu>
References: <1111680958.4242e7be2f317@my.visi.com>
 <200503241625.j2OGPM0Z010999@outgoing.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At 05:25 PM 3/24/2005, Yoav Shapira wrote:
>Hi,
>
> > So, is the only concern the brand name "JCL"?  It seems to be.
>
>Yup.
>
> > If the
> > code is
> > going to be completely different and not backwards compatible with the
> > existing
> > "JCL" it isn't really "JCL", so why call it "JCL"?
>
>Because the brand name is powerful and will lead to rapid adoption.

By the same token, many developers are strongly repulsed by that same=20
brand. (I've heard of several oss project who won't touch jakarta commons=20
with a 12-feet pole because of its reliance on JCL.)

> > Why not call it
> > "UGLI"?  And
>
>Because that's an ugly acronym (pun intended) and an unfamiliar one,=
 leading
>to "yet another logging interface" discussions.

Point well taken. Any alternative names on your mind? I'm all ears. :-)


--=20
Ceki G=FClc=FC

   The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org