Andrea Aime wrote:
> Jody Garnett ha scritto:
>> Bah stupid email button; I was starting to reply and then noticed I 
>> needed to round up some more of the thread onto that page.
>> I have listed the documentation pages that need to be updated on that 
>> page; the explaination probably needs to be in the user guide; the 
>> code example in the developers guide coding conventions etc...
>>
>> I would still like to make use of the GeoTools class; hunting down 
>> initialization options all over the library is not a good idea. If 
>> you have to you can phrase this as a series of methods:
>> - GeoTools.useCommonsLogging() // makes a call to 
>> Logging.setLoggingFactory with the CommonsLoggingFactory.class
>> - GeoTools.useJavaLogging() // makes a call to 
>> Logging.setLoggingFactory with null
> First off, I don't really care where you put these methods, logging
> or geotools is the same for me (not because it's the same for real,
> but because it's not the core of the whole proposal).
Understood; I agree we are down to the details here. This detail is 
important to me as I would like to train the user community to go to the 
GeoTools class for all their integration settings. having to hunt around 
everywhere is no fun.
> Yet, the above proposal figths against the extensibility of the
> Logging.setLogFactory(xxx) idea. What do you do when as a user you
> have to add the Eclips trace api support? You do fork geotools
> and add a GeoTools.useEclipseLogging() method?
We can remove the helper methods; the idea was they would only exist for 
the LoggingFactory classes that ship with GeoTools. For eclipse trace 
integration uDig would need to supply a TraceLoggingFactory instance and 
pass it to the setLoggingFactory method.
> If you really want the method on GeoTools at least let's expose
> a GeoTools.setLoggingFactory(xxx) (that merely forwards to 
> Logging.setLoggingFactory).
Sounds fine.
> I also would like to note that if anyone is going to use the
> same redirection trick (GeoServer is in this position) they
> will have to use Logging.getLogger(xxx) anyways.
Understood.
> Anyways, I'm not advocating putting xxx.setLogFactory(xxx)
> here or there... just saying that it's an open api and it
> should stay open ended.
Agreed.
Jody

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to