James Strachan wrote: > Maybe using introspection on the Log implementation might be easier to add > incrementally to Log implementations without breaking backwards > compatibility.
Introspection or JMX ( which is the other name for introspection :-). Each LogFactory or Log can support a lot of features in a backward compatible way by using JMX. There is absolutely no reason to change the Log interface - it does what it should do. Adding another interface may be a solution - but I don't think it is needed in most cases - and certainly not for management operations. Costin > >> Adding a new method might be OK in a 2.x release (although I don't feel a >> particular compulsion towards it), but would be against the spirit of >> Commons support for backwards compatibility in a 1.x releaese; so I'd >> definitely be -1 there. > > So you might not be -1 if if it were a 2.x release change? > > James > ------- > http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/ > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Everything you'll ever need on one web page > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts > http://uk.my.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
