Ralph Goers wrote: > Carsten Ziegeler said: >> Giacomo Pati wrote: >> >>> If the logger abstraction you mentioned is the Avalon LogEnabled one >>> than yes, we will still have to support that for backward compatability. >>> >> Of course we will support LogEnabled - with the only difference that you >> always get a wrapper around a Log4J (or whatever we decide) logger. > > What do you mean by "always"? I thought that we switched the default from > logkit to log4j a while ago? What more is needed? > This switch never happened - the idea behind this is to remove the support for other logging frameworks completly. No more "you can use this or you can use that or you can implement your own", but a simple "use log4j".
Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG http://www.s-und-n.de http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
