On Mie, 1 de Junio de 2005, 6:13, Carsten Ziegeler dijo: > Antonio Gallardo wrote: > >> >> Perhaps telling to replace with log4j was not good. We can change it >> with >> whatever else, but I don't want to have a non-suported jar in our >> distro. >> > Yes, but there are only a few possibilities that make sense: log4j, > commons logging, jdk14 - we can still support all three but need to > decide for a default one.
Yep. This was my initial intention. Perhaps I raised a tornado by telling my preference. Sorry. I think we should think wich one, maybe jdk4 is a good move. This can also means we can drop the other logging jars from our distro. And this is good: small cocoon ditro, less jars to care of, etc. Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
