On Thursday 20 January 2005 16:24, Jacob Kjome wrote: > > Whether Log4J has added its share to the current state, I will leave > > unsaid... :o) > > If you are going to imply it, please say it (even with a happy face). �I'm > not sure what you mean here, but maybe the UGLI stuff eases this issue.
What I meant was, Log4J is so 'central' to so many systems, that it may be as you put it "fortunate" to share the classes across all clients. Basically, *I* am not sure about either-or... UGLI as a concept is a good move. But watching the thread over at Cocoon, gives me the impression that those who need it most, are not fond of it. I think that discussion ended with "Keep Avalon Logging interfaces, and change to Log4J implementation." The move of breaking Log4J into smaller pieces is also *very* good, IMO, since the common and very stable/compatible parts can be shared and the more peripheral parts, which traditionally have been a bit more shakey, can either be hidden inside each app, or stowed away in sibling/cousin classloaders. Cheers Niclas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
