Henri Yandell wrote, On 06/02/2003 11.18:
Naa, you are right, I have to justify it.On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Henri Yandell wrote:On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:One point that we would like to see is that commons logging is never a *hard* dependency. That means that if commons logging is not in the classpath, the package should be able to work correctly, even if with logging disabled.Please justify this. Is it solely because you have people who refuse to go near commons-logging, or is there a technical reason?I'm just funked. Ignore this.
The fact is that Commons Logging does not advocate IOC, Inversion of Control, that is so dear to us. And also that IMHO these small packages should not log by default, since logging in these cases is not a runtime requirement as in server applications but a debugging and development requirement.
It's ok if it uses Commons Logging, as long as it's not a hard dependency. I think it's a good common ground, and it's what is done ATM.
I have personally committed Commons Logging in POI, and made it not break the usage of the jar if not present, so should make it clear what I think of the usage of Commons Logging in the scenario of reusable components.
:-)
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
