Berin, are you looking for attribution only? This is my understanding of your concern. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: robert burrell donkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 12:11 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On Tuesday, January 29, 2002, at 07:39 PM, Berin Loritsch wrote: > > > Scott Sanders wrote: > > > >> Berin, I think that I understand how you feel, and although the > >> abstraction was implemented outside of Avalon, I do believe that > >> Avalon should be attributed in some way, because it ended > up being so > >> close. What can we do to make this better? The biggest difference > >> that I see is that commons-logging is trying to be super small. I > >> want to talk this out before I give my +1 on the release. I am > >> willing to try and make this better. I am -0 until I can see > >> completely where Berin is coming from. > > > > > > I want it documented in the javadocs and/or other > documentation where > > the > > design > > for this originated, and author attributes for the original > authors of the > > Logger abstraction. > > > > The fact that this is outside of Avalon is beside the > point. However, > > you should > > attribute the original source that influenced its design. > > (perhaps paulo realizes now why i refused to look at his > logging material > from avalon.) > > hi berin > > from my point of view, avalon didn't influence the design any > more than > log4j. please search the list archives if you don't believe me. (i've > taken a *lot* of flak about being unwilling to learning from avalon.) > > i've been waiting since the commons was started for a solution to our > logging problem. every particular logging system that was > proposed was > vetoed (including avalon). commons-logging is unfortunately the only > choice remaining on the table. it's either this or not having > a solution > at all, > > i personally couldn't care less about who gets attributed > with what. if > that's all that's bothering you, please submit a patch. > > on the other hand, if you think that we should be using > whatever-bit-of-code-in-avalon then that's a different issue. please > submit a alternative proposal so that we can vote on it. > > all i want is to have a solution to the logging problem. > > - robert > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:commons-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]>
