Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> I just want to add three points :
> - first, excuse my english
No worries. :-)
> second, I really understand Nick point, and I really think it should
> be addressed, but I'm just not sure that it's the right pace to do it.
As one of the projects that would like to embed it, I might have a different
priority, but that's a separate discussion, and far more involved.
> third, [I] I don't want him to think that we think that log4j
> is a pile of bok...
It isn't. But the discussion of which API should be used to access logging
is separable from that of how logging is implemented.
--- Noel
