lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Hostetter <>
Subject RE: Solr Logging
Date Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:06:38 GMT

: I'd be in favor seeing is how I spent a good bit of time 2 months ago
: writing JUL handlers and log managers to forward log messages to our logging

Have you considered contributing your LogManager and Handlers to log4j so 
other people can benefit from the work you've done?

: framework (log4j).  Pretty much any alternative (Commons, Log4j, SLF4J) is
: better since all of them allow you to _configure_ your underlying
: implementation (including JUL if that's what you're into).  JUL on the other
: hand ~requires you to write code to switch logging implementations or even

this comment doens't make any sense to me ... the 
java.util.logging.manager system property let's you specify any 
implementation you want for your JVM, and the implentation can be as 
configurable as it wants to be.  How is that requiring you to write code 
to switch the implementation?

If you mean "i have to write code to create a logging implementation" then 
yes ... that is true ... someone, somewhere, has to write an 
implementation of the JDK Logging API in order for you to use that 
implentation -- and if you don't like any of the other implentations out 
there, then you might have to write your own.  :)

That's always been my biggest complain about JDK logging .. the API is 
very good, and the "sample" implentation provided by default is just 
usable enough that no one bothers writing a better implementation (with 
more robust configuration) but it's not good enough to keep people from 
complaining about it and putting a lot of effort into building/maintaining 
other logging frameworks.


View raw message