You people are all insane. The size is small, and can be made even smaller if it really needs to be. Having light weight clients does not mean we must drop all client-side logging or hack together our own ultra-minimal logging framework or revert to System.out/printStackTrace garbage.
Log4j is small, fast, configurable and just what we need. --jason On Wednesday 29 May 2002 07:47 pm, marc fleury wrote: > |If I am remember well, we never use log4j directly, right? but a wrapper > |class? What I meant was: couldn't we make the wrapper not require log4j by > |default. > > clearly please no log4j on the client, test or no test on our part > > please no... let's keep it lightweight, > > marcf > > |_______________________________________________________________ > | > |Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference > |August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm > | > |_______________________________________________ > |Jboss-development mailing list > |[EMAIL PROTECTED] > |https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
