logging-log4php-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Knut Urdalen <k...@php.no>
Subject log4php naming convention
Date Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:34:32 GMT
This topic has been discussed before [1]. But I want to highlight it 
again since I'm working with the initial functional version of the PHP 5 
port and IF we should do any changes to how log4php classes are named, 
this is the time to do it. As I see it we have two reasonable options here:

1) Keep the Logger* prefix as today. I haven't heard about any conflicts 
with existing libraries.

Example: LoggerManager, LoggerAppenderFile, LoggerPropertyConfigurator

2) Rename all classes to use the PEAR naming convention [2].

Example: Log4PHP_Manager, Log4PHP_Appender_File, 
Log4PHP_Configurator_Property

If we compare these alternatives to other libraries I see that eZ 
components [3] use the first approach, while Zend Framework [4] use the 
second approach. So the industry has no concrete solution other than 
"prefix your classes".

I only found one documented advantage [5] of using the PEAR naming 
convention over the current one.

What do you think? Which option would you like? Please cast some votes 
with reasons so I know what you think.

Regards,
Knut Urdalen

[1] http://marc.info/?l=log4php-dev&m=113707705331229&w=2
[2] http://pear.php.net/manual/en/standards.naming.php
[3] http://svn.ez.no/svn/ezcomponents/trunk/
[4] http://framework.zend.com/svn/framework/trunk/library/
[5] 
http://www.phpkitchen.com/index.php?/archives/663-Advantages-of-using-the-PEAR-class-naming-convention.html



Mime
View raw message