Well, the point is that commons-logging is not a Logging-API. It is rather an abstraction layer on top of several Logging-API's like the 1.5 logging and Log4j. I would always go for an abstraction layer than for some delegate mechanism between implementations.
Simon On 5/30/06, Robert Engels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Log4j can be configured to use delegate to the standard 1.5 logging. In fact this is preferred so you have STANDARDIZED logging support (and not a different logger for every library). All NEW code should use the 1.5 logging for simplicity of configuration and for future ease of integration. -----Original Message----- From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 3:54 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Lucene and Java 1.5 Robert Engels wrote: > 1.5 has built in Logging support - eliminating the need for Jakarta logging. Logging was first added in Java 1.4. > That is like saying Jarkarta Collections does not use JDK 1.5. No one > that develops NEW software uses Jakarta Collections - they use the > Collections support in the JDK. But lots of folks do use log4j in favor of Java's built-in logging. Commons Logging permits one to code to a generic logging API and let the application configuration determine whether that's Java's logging, log4j or something else. Doug --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
