Inline

On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:

> inline
>
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Sidar Ok <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> @Fabio
>> I meant a look up, as in the pattern desc original, instead of an IoC.
>> Something that gives a singleton logger, nothing big.
>>
>> @Ayende
>>
>> Why do you think it will create a huge amount of work, care to elaborate ?
>>
>>
>
> NH does a lot of logging, all of which will have to be touched
>

It is something, but not huge.


>
>
>>
>> Secondly, I don't think the abstraction is not required, first it will
>> make it possible to swap between loggers and log4net is not mandatory any
>> more,
>
>
> What is the point? I don't see any pain involve with this for our users.
>

There are a lot of people using log4net just because NH (I am one of them)


>
>
>> second, the configuration needed for Log4net, which is not a NH config,
>> will not be needed anymore, reducing unnecessary complexity and noise in
>> config.
>>
>
> Ha? You aren't going to change that, but instead of well known logging
> configuration style, you are not going to support N configuration styles.
>

?? Any configuration will not be mandatory, but logging config will be
outside NH's config. It is a good SoC, isn't it ? If user wants me to log,
(s)he can give me the logger (s)he can give me the one that's already used
within the app, nothing that I mandate.

Just like Castle.

>
>
>>
>> It is not that I am up to start a crusade against log4net, but I also
>> think that code will be in better shape with this abstraction provided over
>> all too.
>>
>>
> I am sorry, but I am afraid that I don't see this providing any value for
> us.
>

I respect your opinion, but if seeing no value doesn't mean objection I am
up for providing a patch for this.



-- 
Sidar Ok

http://www.sidarok.com
http://www.twitter.com/sidarok

Reply via email to