Mailing-List: contact dev-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <469176D7.5050706@omnytex.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 19:44:23 -0400
From: "Frank W. Zammetti" <fzlists@omnytex.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Struts Developers List <dev@struts.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Struts 1/2 and Logging
References: <468EEEC9.9060100@apache.org>
	 <adba96190707061848q73497969k8c76f8e21d7e830f@mail.gmail.com>
	 <468EF2C4.6080102@apache.org>
 <4690B8BE.40709@apache.org>	 <4690EE06.5000609@omnytex.com>
 <16d6c6200707081011x4cd28267y5727373951eac1cb@mail.gmail.com>
 <46915BA9.2070103@omnytex.com> <46917475.4090301@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <46917475.4090301@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

FWIW, my opinion would be go ahead and change it... unless someone can 
show where it would cause trouble, I'm in the better safe than sorry 
camp.  I know of a number of instances where I've seen Struts installed 
in a shared way, either at EAR-level or something like Tomcat's shared 
libs directory... I've never heard any trouble reported from those cases 
though to be fair.

I think the performance/memory implications are the only thing that 
might stop you from wanting to do this... perhaps some benchmarking is 
in order?

Frank

Paul Benedict wrote:
> I use WAS 6.0 at work and it took me 3 full days to figure out how to 
> get log4j working with it. Ugh. Yes, the software is an elephant.
> 
> Anyway, despite the fact that Struts 1 supports only static logging, I 
> believe this position could be evaluated. Correct me when wrong, but the 
> article states that instance logging should belong in libraries that 
> could be shared. What if a company wants to integrate Struts or XWork 
> into their application server software? Perhaps a typically user 
> wouldn't want to share Struts libraries in the parent classloader, but 
> what about in  J2EE server? It's just a thought.
> 
> It wouldn't be too hard to convert the static loggers.
> 
> Paul
> 
> Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
>> Martin Cooper wrote:
>>> It would be the same thing in the sense of the "direction" of the class
>>> loader, and I would expect the same screwy things to happen. And if 
>>> you're
>>> using WebFear, then I'd fully expect other screwy things to happen as 
>>> well,
>>> as a free bonus. ;-)
>>
>> Hehe, I know *exactly* what you mean :)  Between WS and RAD, my hair 
>> is starting to look like Bill Clinton's, but at a much younger age!
>>
>>> Martin Cooper
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
AIM/Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
Author of "Practical Ajax Projects With Java Technology"
  (2006, Apress, ISBN 1-59059-695-1)
and "JavaScript, DOM Scripting and Ajax Projects"
  (2007, Apress, ISBN 1-59059-816-4)
Java Web Parts - http://javawebparts.sourceforge.net
  Supplying the wheel, so you don't have to reinvent it!

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