> -----Original Message----- > From: simon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:19 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [logging] Enterprise Common Logging... dare we say 2.0? > > On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 11:52, Martin Cooper wrote: > > This sure doesn't sound like Commons Logging would be "an ultra-thin > > bridge between different logging libraries" any more. > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/logging/ > > > > This sounds more like a different package altogether. IMO, we have > > enough trouble as it is with some people resisting adding a > dependency > > on Commons Logging that the last thing I want to see is a bunch more > > functionality - and size - added to this component. > > It looks to me like the changes will be just a couple of fairly simple > new classes for globalisation, and a couple of trivial methods to > support the JSR-47 "finer" log level. I don't think that's a big deal. > > The "repackaging" of the logging library to separate the "interfaces" > from the log-library-specific adapters is something that has already > been proposed on this list, and clearly will *reduce* jar file size > (though add complexity by forcing users to deploy two jars instead of > one). > > It is less clear how the proposed changes to the 'discovery' process > would affect code size/complexity, and I agree a close eye needs to be > kept on this to make sure commons-logging stays the "thin > bridge" it was > always meant to be.
Further, the JCL User Guide has a section labeled "National Language Support And Internationalization", in which the following excerpt appears: "NLS internationalization SHOULD be strongly considered for used for fatal, error, warn, and info messages. It is generally considered optional for debug and trace messages. Perhaps more direct support for internationalizing log messages can be introduced in a future or alternate version of the Log interface." So it seems to me that the suggestion from IBM is not necessarily making the "thin bridge" any fatter. Rather, it is simply following up on what is already suggested in the User Guide. > > Regards, > > Simon > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
