I've seen many people wrap log4net just so they could swap it out down the road..
Doing that, you lose the context sensitivity of having a logger in each class.. one of log4net's greatest strengths.. And I've never ever seen it actually replaced down the road.. It makes much more sense to create a custom appender to write to whatever system you need down the road, while still using log4net as the plumbing within your application. I'd advise HEAVILY against wrapping log4net to everyone. You will be trading a strength for a sense of flexibility you'll never actually use. -Peter On 10/23/07, shaeney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > José Joye wrote: > > > > However. in order not to be too hardly tight to log4net, we decided > > to build a facade to abstract the Logging framework. This was done in > > order to easily switch the logging framework we use behind the > > scene. > > > > José > > > > Thanks Jose, I had already decided to take that approach in case we wanted > to swap out the underlying framework at some point. > > I am going to produce a test-bed app using both frameworks and see how I > get > on with both synchronous and asynchronous messaging. If I get time, I will > move onto logging from different AppDomains etc > > Cheers, > Steve > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Newbie%3A-Log4Net-or-MS-Logging-Application-Block--tf4669838.html#a13362856 > Sent from the Log4net - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
