When:
 - your app gets one of those Error (fatal) exceptions that are not
   just due to some introspection mishandling

 - or some really strange situation is detected and the app logic 
   is to call it quits...

...you can always be hopeful that the logging system is still able
to log a FATAL level event and configure your logger to mail you 
or page you... or whomever is the vict... er... sysadmin.

BTW, I think there is an configuration option in Velocity to mail
someone in case of a FATAL event if using Log4J. Coded by Jon, me
thinks.


Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 11:14 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: RE: [Logging] [VOTE-REDUX] Commons Logging 1.0 Release
> 
> 
> I personally believe that a fatal 'log' should just be an Exception, but
> I could be wrong :)
> 
> Scott
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paulo Gaspar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 2:33 PM
> > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> > Subject: RE: [Logging] [VOTE-REDUX] Commons Logging 1.0 Release
> > 
> > 
> > > > (2) Add a trace() level
> > > >
> > > > There was a suggestion to add trace(message) and
> > > trace(message,exception)
> > > > methods to the commons-logging API, with the idea that trace is a 
> > > > level "below" debug.  I'm personally OK with doing that *before* a
> > > 1.0 release,
> > > > but will likely oppose it afterwards (adding new public 
> > methods to 
> > > > Java interfaces is hard on backwards compatibility).  
> > Therefore, I 
> > > > think this is a "now or never" decision.  What do you guys think?
> > > >
> > >
> > > +1.  I think this should be done, if it would be vetoed at a later 
> > > +date.
> > > I am happy to add this myself.
> > 
> > Funny... somewhere between the 50K lines and the 90K lines of 
> > code in my current project, I started having doubts about the 
> > "just 5 debug levels" idea that Peter and Ceki (used to?) defend.
> > 
> > Actually, if I had to choose just 5, I would choose:
> >  1 TRACE
> >  2 DEBUG
> >  3 WARN
> >  4 INFO
> >  5 ERROR
> > 
> > and skip FATAL... which (argh!) gets me a bit closer to agree 
> > with JSR047.
> > 
> > Ok, to redeem myself a bit from such sin, I still think they 
> > (JSR47) have too many "finesse" levels and that FATAL 
> > (missing in JSR47), while maybe having a lower use count has 
> > a critical usefulness. Not to talk about the very cluttered API!
> > 
> > 
> > Have fun,
> > Paulo Gaspar
> > 
....

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

Reply via email to