> And a good one. I'm not familiar with Velocity or it's
> particular approach,
> but the basic idea of separating logging interface from logging
> implementation is sound. Components such as fop should not require a
> particular logging implementation, they should write to an interface and
> allow different implementations of that interface to be configured. Any
> serious application that uses fop will have its own application
> wide logging
> facilities and will not be interested in fop's logging implementation.
Actually, we had the same problem of "Which logging API do I use?"; and we
feel that others will likely have the same problem. As a result, we wrote
an interface called Trunk (http://openinstitute.org/trunk/) that provides a
fairly full-featured generic logging interface. There is already a Log4J
driver, and more will be written soon. This interface could be considered
for use in FOP; and even if it is not used, please do check it out and email
with any comments that you have.
Since we just started the openinstitute.org site last week, only the
Javadocs are on there currently; but as soon as I package it up nicely and
upload it (probably within the next day or two), the code will be there too.
We're also looking for other Java developers to get involved with
openinstitute.org; so if you're interested, check out our Wiki site which is
linked off the main page at http://openinstitute.org/.
- Eric
P.S. Our ISP has been having quite a few problems lately, so if you can't
access the site, try again in a few hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
