On 9 Dec 2004, at 22:52, Richard Sitze wrote:
I'm very interested in any insight into how to leverage the existing i18n
project... that said, I have no interest in mandating use of i18n. Commons
logging is lightweight, needs to remain as lightweight as possible.
For i18n, my perspective is that Jakarta Commons Logging (JCL) must adhere
to the most simple/standard mechanisms supported by Java. If your
application uses i18n on a GUI, then perhaps Jakarta i18n is reasonable
for that use... but I'm not sure it's appropriate for the behind the
scenes work that logging represents.
+1
commons-logging has already provided to have a footprint which is too big (both in terms of jar size and in terms of dependencies). of course, i'd be happy to see separate compatible internalizing adapters perhaps shipped with commons-logging as separate artifacts.
- robert
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
