Ceki, This sounds great. You might want to cross-post this to JBoss-dev. They're already instrumenting log4j in a basic fashion, and I'm sure they want to further this work. Some experienced JMX developers hang out on that list, so you're bound to get some useful feedback.
Also, I highly reccommend the JBoss microkernel as an excellent JMX server. - Matt -----Original Message----- From: Ceki Gulcu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 7:53 AM To: Log4J Developers List Subject: Re: [VOTE] Proposal: Log4Init servlet class It really depends on what is contained in Log4jInit servlet. If it is just a copy of what is in the existing log4j manual then the added value will be somewhat limited. However, if this addition is the harbinger of new log4j developments in the servlet arena, I welcome the effort. Another worthy effort is JMX support in log4j. Here is a call for volunteers: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=log4j-dev&m=102391028026244&w=2 See JMX snapshots at: http://jakarta.apache.org/~ceki/jmx1.jpg http://jakarta.apache.org/~ceki/jmx2.jpg http://jakarta.apache.org/~ceki/jmx3.jpg At 21:52 06.10.2002 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >In the quest of finding more things to do that one has time for, I propose >that we explore the inclusion of a Log4jInit servlet class in the official >log4j library. This would be a servlet class that can be used to initialize >log4j in a web application. Everyone seems to have their own version of one >that all do the same basic stuff. > >I am making this proposal because if this class is used so often, then I >think a basic version should be available in the official log4j library for >general use or for specific extension by developers. It will make log4j >"easier" to use because it will have a useful off-the-shelf class >specifically designed for web applications. > >However, I would like this component to be "owned" by someone else that will >put the energy into it. If this person is not a committer, then I volunteer >to "champion" and review the code, and make sure it gets committed into cvs >after review. But my v1.3 plate is full with plugins, receivers, watchdogs, >and filters. > >A number of folks have stated an interest in contributing to log4j. Here's >your chance to create something that almost every log4j web application >based developer will use. If no one steps up, then it will just wait until >one of us has the time. > >I think there are a number of options for this class that can be explored, >such as possibly using a distinct logger repository per web >application/servlet/etc. There may be other related components that could >be considered. > >But first, what do the other committers think? > >+1 > >-Mark > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Ceki TCP implementations will follow a general principle of robustness: be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others. -- Jon Postel, RFC 793 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
