Emperor >Cryptic sounds negative... ;) > It is in a way. It is veil that is unecessary in a developer list.
It try to find who you are : http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=DarkEmperor I hope the first line is not you ;-) - Paul > > >>-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- >>Von: Paul Hammant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Gesendet: Samstag, 30. M�rz 2002 07:41 >>An: Avalon-Phoenix Developers List >>Betreff: Re: AW: Statusable >> >> >>Eung-ju, >> >>Sorry dude. I knew your were trading behind some cryptic >>email address. >>It was 'colus' of course. >> >>- Paul >> >>>Emperor is not me. ;-) >>> >>>----- Original Message ----- >>>From: "Paul Hammant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>To: "Avalon-Phoenix Developers List" >>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 9:30 PM >>>Subject: Re: AW: Statusable >>> >>> >>>>Eung-Ju, >>>> >>>>Yes that would work, but the secondary need would be to >>>> >>buffer things >> >>>>for repeated use in a management app. >>>> >>>>Maybe I'll just keep using System.out :-) It is not a problem ... >>>> >>>>- Paul >>>> >>>>>Why not use a separate Logger to output to console? So the newbies >>>>>wouldn't have to do anything, and you could easily disable console >>>>>logging or redirect it to a file. >>>>> >>>>>>-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- >>>>>>Von: Leo Simons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>>>>>Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. M�rz 2002 21:37 >>>>>>An: Avalon-Phoenix Developers List >>>>>>Betreff: RE: Statusable >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I'm +1 but as this would break logger binary compatibility it >>>>>>requires a new release of logger, and maybe also of excalibur/ >>>>>>framework (not exactly sure where the changes are neccessary?). >>>>>> >>>>>>So we might still need to keep writing to System.out for >>>>>> >>now... you >> >>>>>>volunteering to look into this? ;) >>>>>> >>>>>>Also, did Pete ever reply to the question below? Pete? He is >>>>>>king-of-the-logkit of course, so we need his infinite >>>>>> >>wisdom on this >> >>>>>>:P >>>>>> >>>>>>cheers, >>>>>> >>>>>>- Leo >>>>>> >>>>>>>-----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- >>>>>>>Van: Paul Hammant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>>>>>>Verzonden: Thursday, March 28, 2002 9:05 PM >>>>>>>Aan: Avalon-Phoenix Developers List >>>>>>>Onderwerp: Re: Statusable >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I think this is worth re-opening. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Reason? Well we are about to have SAR files >>>>>>> >>downloadable from the >> >>>>>>>website and drop into an arbitary Phoneix. In terms of >>>>>>> >>the "five >> >>>>>>>second test", it would be handy if the blocks could offer >>>>>>> >>>>>>some advice >>>>>> >>>>>>>after start(). >>>>>>> >>>>>>>For example if a product uses Jo! it may want to say. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "HTTP Service mounted on port 8080" >>>>>>> >>>>>>>At the moment I find myself writing to System.out to help >>>>>>> >>>>>>the newbie >>>>>> >>>>>>>know what they should do after launching Phoenix with an >>>>>>> >>app. It >> >>>>>>>would be nice if there were some controlled way of output >>>>>>> >>>>>>such status >>>>>> >>>>>>>info for a block. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The original idea was to have Statusable >>>>>>> >>>>>>setStatus(String msg) ], >>>>>> >>>>>>>but that was rightly shot down as there is much overlap >>>>>>> >>>>>>with Logger. >>>>>> >>>>>>>If Logger were to have a new method for setting of status (or >>>>>>>priority) and the status, as well as being output to the >>>>>>> >>>>>>log target, >>>>>> >>>>>>>were buffered by Phoenix for other use : >>>>>>> >>>>>>>1) later retrieval by a management console, webapp or GUI. >>>>>>>2) after system startup, a once only outputting of >>>>>>> >>statii to the >> >>>>>>>console (for the newbie) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>- Paul >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Emperor is making the same point about similarities with >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>Logging. I >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>am not so sure there is that overlap with the current >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>Logger.class. >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>If it had status(String st); as a method I might think it >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>could do >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>the job. I am not sure how we would stand on that >>>>>>>>> >>addition given >> >>>>>>>>>the recent backwards-compatability flamewars ;-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>How about extending the Priority by adding a STATUS >>>>>>>> >>level and do >> >>>>>>>>logger.log(XXXPriority.STATUS, message)? True, Priority is final >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>but I don't >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>see any reason why it is like that. Why would you use >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>logger.log(..) method >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>then? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Mircea >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>-- >>>>>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>>>>>> >>>>>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> >>>>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: >>>>>>> >>>>>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>-- >>>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>>>><mailto:avalon-phoenix-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> >>>>>>For additional commands, >>>>>>e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>-- >>>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>>>><mailto:avalon-phoenix-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> >>>>>>For additional commands, >>>>>>e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>>> >>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: >>>>> >>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>-- >>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>> >>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>>>For additional commands, e-mail: >>>> >>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> >>>-- >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>> >><mailto:avalon-phoenix-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>>For additional commands, >>> >>e-mail: >> >>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>-- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >><mailto:avalon-phoenix-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>For additional commands, >>e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
