Michael Becke wrote: > Regarding JCL I wonder if a lack of active development is an issue for > us. As Simon states in his email there are no known bugs and no > outstanding feature requests. JCL is basically done.
Exactly. Despite widespread criticism I consider JCL quite good for the job. > I'm guessing it > will still be supported where necessary, but not much support is > necessary for a project with no bugs and no plans for future > development. > > The bigger question is the one that Odi brings up I think. What are > our "clients" going to use? If consumers of HttpClient are all moving > to SLF4J or java.util.logging then it might make sense for us to > switch. Well, with JCL we already support java.util.logging as an underlying implementation. java.util.logging is NOT an alternative for JCL. But SLF4J might be. The question for us boils down to http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCLIENT-416 Maybe reopen. Odi --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
