> If I recall correctly, JCLI didn't exist when we last had > this discussion, > and the impression (possibly incorrect) at the time was that Avalon's > LogKit prereqed the Avalon Framework. In any case, JCLI not > only doesn't > prereq any outside framework, it has it as a part of it's design > requirements to stay that way.
Yup, it did exist, at least in August: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=99850196719458&w=2 However, that vote got a total of zero responses, and we went with the log4j-centric solution. At the time, that was my leaning, but since we've been with log4j a while and don't really utilize any of the custom APIs, I am all for doing the JCLI and being done with it. > I'm +1 with Richard proceeding as planned. For everyone's > sanity, I just > suggest that the changes be integrated either quickly or > incrementally. > This effort is undoubtably going to touch a lot of files, and > I don't want > to see a lot of changes lost due to incorrect merges. +1 Do we continue to include log4j with Axis? (I vote yes) --Glen
