Jakarta Commons is recreating, piece by piece, various parts of Avalon and more than once I've heard strong suggestions that all should follow that "standard".

How should we deal with these issues?

Would it make sense to use Commons Logging interfaces and work with Commons configuration on Avalon 5?

Here is a FW of a mail just posted on turbine-dev. Turbine is one of our latest users.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [vote] plans for turbine 2.3
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 01:59:00 +0100
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Turbine Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Turbine Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
> on 2002/12/10 3:16 PM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>I'm not suggesting that you use Logkit, but the Avalon logging interface
>>and facades.
>
>
> I'm strongly -1 on using the Avalon logging interface because this is
> something that belongs in Commons. There is no reason for Avalon to have
> *yet another logging interface* when commons-logging is available.

Actually, the Avalon interface IIRC is older.

> Everyone who doesn't want to standardize on a single logging implementation
> should at least standardize on a single logging interface and that should be
> commons-logging. If you have a problem with commons-logging, then it should
> be addressed there, not re-implemented somewhere else.

It has not been reimplemented, rather the opposite, and your attitude is
of no help.

Anyway, I will propose again to our list that we use the Logger
interface somehow in the new Avalon 5, or try somehow to reunite the scism.

Remember though that the fact that commons strongly opposes anything
that has even a remote hint about avalon framework really doesn't help.


--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to