At 02:00 30/4/01 -0700, Morgan Delagrange wrote: >I guess I don't really care whether or not there is a global "we use >LOG4J" proclamation for Commons, but it seems to make sense in this >case. There seem to be a fair number of "igore this error and hope >everything is ok" statements that should be captured at a lower debug >level. HttpClient seems to have a little of its own custom logging stuff, >but I think LOG4J would be more appropriate. Depends on how many you want to block from using the product ;) Some projects use logkit (another logging toolkit at apache), some use a fascade, some will switch when the logging JSR goes final ... come to think of it I don't know of any that directly use Log4j. Consequently you would be cutting off a lot of people from using it. Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-----------------------------------------------------*
