----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [logging] Need interface...
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Morgan Delagrange wrote: > > > Is that not also the case with Log4J and JDK 1.4? > > Only the Avalon logger has a notion of IoC AFAIK. It > > seems odd to be supporting IoC logging in > > commons-logging, when we know that all of our other > > components will not be able to utilize it. > > Please move the discussion about IoC and Avalon to avalon-dev. I'm sorry if this is such a politically charged term for you. I'm merely referring to the practice of externally generating a class' Log object. Call it what you like. > The proposal didn't mentioned IoC and I don't see how this get into > this. > > Most of the components implement Beans patterns and should support > runtime changes to config ( JMX or not ). That has nothing to > do with any inversion of control, it's standard java. In this particular case, we would not implement this interface in our components, because we do not require that an external framework/factory/whatever generate Log objects for individual classes. And since we don't expect such behaviour in Commons components, it seems counter-productive to support it in the logger, which would introduce the possibility of such an interface being used inconsistently. > Avalon and IoC are 'special' in that they require only one way > to do things - and that's not something we'll do in commons or > other projects. But that's their problem, not ours. > > Costin > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
