--- Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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, Right, using log4j would prevent a lot of people from using the code in Commons. Log4j is such a difficult package to use. Sorry but I don't have more time to write a proper answer. Cheers, Ceki __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/
