On Saturday, July 28, 2001, at 06:16 AM, Scott Sanders wrote:
>>> Ok, I can understand why we would want to have integrated logging as a
>>> convinience feature for the application. However, I'd like to have the
>>> client go into no logging by default, and have the application use the
>>> interceptors to log what it wishes to log. I believe the current
>>> interceptors should be enough for that task (but we can add
>>> additional hooks
>>> if it's not the case).
>>>
>>> What do you think ?
>>>
>>
>> as a (hopefully) future user of httpclient, i'd certainly like to not
>> have
>> to download and use log4j with httpclient. i'm probably plugging
> httpclient
>> into an existing application, with existing logging stuff (not log4j) and
>> the plugable logging approach would be much better for me.
>>
>> just my $0.02 :)
>>
>
> I am a current user of http-client, and I also use log4j in the same
> project. But I would rather see the interceptor approach taken, because
> my
> use of http-client needs to be completly transparent to the application
> administration. This is indeed the way to go, and I intend to push
> digester
> in this direction as well. It can afford the same level of functionality,
> while allowing the end user more control.
>
there seems to me to be a common problem for most of the packages in the
commons. everybody has their own favourite logging systems - for example
jason (and me) love log4j, the avalon team has logkit whereas other people
don't see why system.out and system.err shouldn't be used and so on.
supporting all these options is not viable since it would mean too many
dependencies but not supporting them will risk fragmentation of the code
bases as people change stuff to use their favourite logging mechanism. for
example, if digester doesn't allow me to use log4j for logging i'd
probably need (sooner or later) to write my own version (supporting log4j)
.
i'd say that maybe a micro-logger commons project would provide a common
solution. the idea would be to create a basic logging interface and then
adapter's for people's favourite logging systems (whether log4j, LogKit,
system.out or PrintWriter class (like digester)).
given that this project was *small* i don't seem why including it as a
dependency would be a problem.
comments?
- robert
