On Thursday 24 March 2005 07:00, Ceki G�lc� wrote: > Thanks Mark. Just finished reading it. As you said, it does not go into > terrible but otherwise a pretty decent article.
Didn't we discuss before the possibility to make JUL the application API, and
Log4J the backend logging provider? Would that kill off a lot of the
commons-loggings and similar issues, or is it just transferred elsewhe\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\re?
JUL was probably never designed to be a front end but rather as the implementation, that is as both the front and back ends. Contrast that with an API like JDBC which only acts as the the front end. JCL tried fill the gap but unfortunately introduced new and relatively severe problems. Sometimes the remedy can be worse than the disease.
Maybe we should consider an independent project acting as a facade for the existing alogging APIs. Comments?
Cheers Niclas
-- Ceki G�lc�
The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
