Part of my wanting to use commons logging is to use java.util.logging package. Because we're a tiny company we try to stick w/ built-in libraries when possible. Even though the jar file count would stay the same, I'm assuming the commons-logging library will change far less than log4j? Therefor one less headache when updating apps at our clients.
Advertising
This may all be moot because we also use Velocity and I'm looking at Baritus.. Both which have requirements on log4j. Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Wheeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 1:52 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j > > I don't have an opinion either way, and no objections to > those who are in favor of the switch... but I guess I'm not > really clear on how switching to commons-logging helps the > jar file explosion. As I see it: > > Current: log4j.jar > Proposal: commons-logging.jar + log4j.jar -- or -- > commons-logging.jar + (JDK logging) > > So as I see it, it's 1 jar (current) vs. 1 or 2 jars (proposal). > > What am I missing here? > > -Thomas ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=click [INVALID FOOTER]
