This summer, my company asked me to look for a logging framework in
order to ingrate it into our product.
I needed a logging framework in C++, so I took a look at log4cpp and
log4cplus.
Log4cpp is licensed under the LGPL, which was not suitable for my company.
Logcplus is licensed under the APL, but the project contributors do not
want to depend on other library than the standard C/C++ libraries (which
implies that log4cplus will not implement the classes DOMConfigurator,
ODBCAppender, and SMTPAppender).
So I decided to create another port licensed under the APL, and that
would implement the DOMConfigurator, ODBCAppender, and SMTPAppender.
Moreover, with log4cxx, custom appenders and layouts can be configured
through the DOMConfigurator and PropertyConfigurator classes. This
functionality implies to reproduce a part of the Java introspection
mechanism. So log4cxx base classes are quite different from what can be
found in log4cplus and log4cpp.
About the LS project, I propose that
- the configuration xml and property files should have the same syntax
in every subproject implementation. For example, if you have a big
project with a server-side implemented in C++, and a client-side
implemented in Java/JSP, you would like to use the same log
configuration file.
- Following the same idea, the appender and layout formats should be
compatible, in order, for example, to log from Java and C++, into the
same file, through the FileAppender, with the same XML format, through
the XMLAppender.
- All subprojects should be compatible with Chainsaw or LogFactor5 at
least through the XMLSocketAppender.
- All subprojects could have the same witness files and scripts for
functionality and performance tests. It could be an easy way to compare
each subproject.
Michael.
My company
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
Michael,
Thank you for your vote of confidence. Could you be kind enough to
give your opinion on the C++ ports of log4j, including log4cxx? Why
are there 3 of them?
Thanks in advance,
At 01:53 PM 12/15/2003 +0100, Michael CATANZARITI wrote:
Hi,
+1 for me !
--
Michael CATANZARITI,
Log4cxx Administrator (http://log4cxx.sf.net)
-Original Message-
From: Ceki Gülcü [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 7:07 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Logging services top level project
Hello,
Several months ago I floated the idea of creating a top level project
covering
logging services. The idea was received favorably. Moreover, we
currently have
or shortly will have inter-operability with the following log4j
sister projects:
* Log4Perl
* Log4Net
* Log4Cxx (c++)
* Log4CPlus
* Log4PHP
* JDK1.4's util.logging framework
I would like propose to the board the creation of the Apache Logging
Services
top level project.
Here is an initial draft of the resolution to be submitted to the board
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?LoggingApacheOrg/BoardResoluion
Do we want to do this? I do and here is my +1.
[X] +1, let's do it
[ ] 0, I don't know
[ ] -1, no, that's a bad idea because:...
--
Ceki Gülcü
For log4j documentation consider The complete log4j manual
ISBN: 2970036908 http://www.qos.ch/shop/products/clm_t.jsp
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
