At 02:05 22.02.2001 +1100, you wrote:
>At 09:39 21/2/01 -0500, Ted Husted wrote:
>>Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> 1) We need to make the abstraction for logging independent of Turbine and a
>>> Jakarta "standard".
>>>
>>> 2) Standardize Jakarta on a single concrete implementation
>>> (jakarta-log4j?).
>>
>>I'd say we do (1) based on (2), and the propose (1) as a Sun JSR. Log4j
>>then becomes the reference implementation ;0)
>
>There is already a logging JSR but log4j does not implement it ;)
AFAIK, JSR47 is an implementation not an interface. I have asked Graham Hamilton to
let me peek at JSR47's implementation but he did not reply. It is also not clear to
what extent JSR47 is tied to JDK 1.4. Log4j is compatible with JDK 1.1.
JSR47 and log4j are very similar at the architectural level. They differ in small and
even minute details. The problem is that as far as the Java compiler is concerned they
are not interchangeable.
I am not sure it makes sense for us to re-implement JSR47 with log4j underneath. What
good would that do? Some JSR47 fields rely on JDK 1.4. I don't have access to Merlin
nor to JSR 47 code.
What would make sense is to adapt log4j configurators, appenders and layouts to JSR47
when it comes out. That's where 90% percent of the code is.
JSR47 is OK on paper. However, I do not see anyone from Sun talking to us to see if we
can work together. They are doing their thing and hope that the rest of the world will
follow. Cheers, Ceki
