I am so quiet because I completely agree with Costin and he
is doing the talking.

Just to say that there is another voice saying the same.


Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 11:20 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List; Morgan Delagrange
> Subject: Re: [logging] Default log
>
>
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Morgan Delagrange wrote:
>
> > Probably not a good idea, because at certain log levels we
> would be sending
> > DEBUG information to standard error, which would really junk up
> logs that
> > specifically divert standard error to another file.  Your true error
> > messages would get buried in a mish-mash of debug statements.
>
> Same is true if we log to stdout, except that normal output will also
> get messed. I agree with Craig, stderr is better.
>
>
> > IMO "info" is too high.  Some applications generate a lot of
> "info" output.
> > However, I'm not too concerned about it; I doubt many users will use
> > SimpleLog for long.
>
> 'info' maps ( at least in my view ) to normal messages like "Application
> started succefully", etc. Things that you want to see.
>
> Warns, error, fatal reflect 'special' conditions, if everything works
> you'll not see any of those anyway.
>
> BTW, since commons-logging is supposed to act as a wrapper for
> multiple loggers, I hope in a future version ( 1.1 maybe ) it
> can also provide a 'default' setting for those loggers that
> is consistent ( and default to a reasonable level like info ).
>
> > An alternative to defaulting to SimpleLog would be to take the Log4J
> > approach; immediately print out a single error message if a logger
> > implementation has not been selected, then default to NoOp.
> This would be
> > my preference, I think.
>
> And subject the users to yet-another-configuration-nightmare ?
> I would stick with println(), it's faster and better and works
> without requiring me to set system properties ( which I may not
> be able to ) or learn a new system.
>
> Droping a jar file in lib/ is reasonably easy. I hope to fix
> the Log4jFactory to detect somehow if a config is present, and if
> not to provide some decent defaults - so using log4j instead
> of SimpleLog would just provide speed and more features, not
> config overhead.
>
> ( but I don't want to hold the release for that - I think
> the API is in a decent shape, and it can go on, we'll improve
> it in future versions if we need to )
>
> Costin
>
>
> --
> 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]>

Reply via email to