IMHO, the simplicity of Debug/info/warn/error/fatal is one of Log4j's strengths. I personally would not want Trace However, if I required Trace-style logging, I would simply log to a dotted logger name "---.trace".
E.g If I have a component "com.mycompany.mycomponent", I have a complimentary "com.mycomany.mycomponent.trace" logger, and configure Log4j to suppress this logger under normal circumstances. The other advantage to this approach is that you can get all Trace style logs into their own appender very easily (attach the appropriate appender to each .trace logger in the config), which means my trace logs are separated easily from the other debug, which I think is what a lot of people are worried about. I can't see anyone wanting to wade through Trace AND Debug log messages to find things out, but maybe I can't see the use case that other people have. Having said all this, as a Log4j developer I wonder since we've previously made a lot of effort to match JDK 1.4's syntax (e.g. Category->Logger, Priority->Level), one might argue that it's not too much effort to go that extra mile to just add the Trace level for those that way inclined. Perhaps those log4j dev-people who were involved in the Log4j-JDK1.4 matching development might be able to comment on any rationale etc. But for me, I'm very happy with the current Trace-less log4j. Paul Smith --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
