> >> And from the client point of view, > lowest-common-denominator is usually > just fine. > > Then why do we need so many solutions? Why not focus all > resources on one > kick-butt solution?
Because everyone thinks they can do better than what is already out there? Why didn't Sun just dedicate a couple of engineers to the log4j project and then use log4j in jdk 1.4? > I suspect the lack of focus on different logging solutions > will tend to make > each one mediocre. > > I'm a fan of the KISS principle, and I'd love to see (from a user's > perspective) one top-notch solution as opposed to numerous > options, none of > which are as strong as they could be if everyone joined forces. > > From a resource allocation perspective, I think we're hurting > ourselves with > many solutions, I'd rather see a standard implementation > endorsed by all. There is a place for a solution like commons-logging. Let's say I am a commercial developer of super-duper library X. I decide to use log4j in my library code because it is obviously the best solution. Everything is great because everyone agrees that log4j is perfect for their needs too. And then one day Company Y comes along and says "We want to use your library on our embedded system, but we don't have room in our static memory for the 180+K log4j jar that your library is dependent on. Can you create a version for us that just uses System.out.println()?" Yeah, sure, no problem, if the price is right. But if you were using something like commons-logging (or even a home grown wrapper class), it would be simple to use a different logging class, much smaller than the 180K log4j.jar and none of the library code would need to change at all. Maybe it is not as good as log4j, but it suits their needs just fine. How often does it happen? Maybe not often, but it does happen. People have different requirements and it is hard to be all things to all people. -Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
