At 11:10 10.10.2002 -0400, Steve Downey wrote: >It looks like the concept is available in both LogKit and Log4J, although in >slightly differenct forms. I don't know if the forms are compatible. > >It's not available in JDK 1.4 logging. > >So, the question is two-fold. Can the differences between LogKit and Log4J be >harmonized, and is this useful if it might be a no-op?
Yes on both accounts. Yes they should be compatible, and yes a no-op under JDK 1.4 is better than having nothing under log4j or logkit. >On Wednesday 09 October 2002 09:02 pm, Sean C. Sullivan wrote: > > I spotted this message on the jboss-developer mailing list. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Jason Dillon [mailto:jason@pl...] > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 8:24 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Design: Plans to decouple JBoss from log4j > > > > > > > > > It is too bad commons logging does not provide abstractions > > > for a ContextStack or ContextMap similar to Log4j's NDC and > > > MDC. These are valuable constructs. > > > > > > Do you know anyone on the commons logging team? > > > > > > --jason -- Ceki TCP implementations will follow a general principle of robustness: be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others. -- Jon Postel, RFC 793 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
