On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Ceki G�lc� wrote: | | No, it does not. I would prefer if log4j did not either. Furthermore, I | also suspect that some of the other committers have changed their minds | since the last vote on the subject.
Okay. I really don't see why you don't want trace. It is very interesting for development, and further interesting for debugging in production, when some subsystem starts to act weird. The domains system is a totally different thing, as I understand it. Lets say that I make a domain for some "authentication" subsystem. I'd still want to be able to enter that domain into trace mode. Or do you suggest that I make "authentication" and "authentication.trace" domains? Wouldn't I need two loggers then? As a comment to domains, I already use categories in this fashion. This started out due to the possibility of us obfuscating the company's code, thus not being able to use classnames. But it has ended up as a very nice, hierarchical division of the server into .. domains? Oh well. I just hope trace sticks to log4j, at least. Endre --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
