DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG� RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34185>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND� INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34185 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-31 22:44 ------- I thought an example would be useful :) So, I've create a branch in jakarta/commons/logging called DON_QUIXOTE and added some example code into their. This lifts off a superclass called LogManager (for no very good reason) from LogFactory. The most common user method (getLog) is rewired so that it first calls the superclass. When LogFactory is in the same classloader (ideally in the same jar) as LogManager, the call will be routed through LogFactory. This preserves backwards compatibility. This is the way that Richard and I saw JCL2 proceeding. An option which you may want to consider is compile-time statically binding an alternative LogManager implementation to UGLI. This (I believe) would in line with the spirit of the UGLI way whilst also ensure no actual core dependencies either way. If anyone feels this sounds like a reasonable approach and would like to take a look at creating some experimental implementation code along those lines, I'd be glad to review it for possible inclusion in the branch. I'm don't intend to particularly push this solution (UGLI is the responsibility of others) but I think it's important that all possible solutions are considered. Robert -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
