Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
Actually, the only reason that Baritus has a dependency on Log4J, is because Maverick has (and Baritus is an extension of Maverick). Velocity does not have a direct dependency on Log4J (see http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/developer-guide.html#Configuring%20the%20Log%20System), but it's probably easiest to work with Log4J in this case. About Log4J... I wouldn't be too scared about changes; It's been pretty stable for a long time now. And then about Baritus... allthough it does not seem very bussy, it's very actively maintained. Most of the communication right now is within the company I work for and between us and some of our customers who also use it. It would be great to have your suggestions, especially on documentation etc. as I am still working on that. Furthermore, as I asked before (and I will not ask again after this... honest;) ), I would *really* appreciate it if the maintainers of Maverick could place a link to Baritus on the Maverick site. Baritus it not a competitor of Maverick, it's just a non-intrusive addition to Maverick for the people that would like to use Maverick with some of the features (like validation, error reporting and using interceptors) you can find with frameworks like Struts and WebWork. Eelco - Original Message - From: "Jon Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 9:31 PM Subject: RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j Part of my wanting to use commons logging is to use java.util.logging package. Because we're a tiny company we try to stick w/ built-in libraries when possible. Even though the jar file count would stay the same, I'm assuming the commons-logging library will change far less than log4j? Therefor one less headache when updating apps at our clients. This may all be moot because we also use Velocity and I'm looking at Baritus.. Both which have requirements on log4j. Jon > -Original Message- > From: Thomas Wheeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 1:52 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j > > I don't have an opinion either way, and no objections to > those who are in favor of the switch... but I guess I'm not > really clear on how switching to commons-logging helps the > jar file explosion. As I see it: > > Current: log4j.jar > Proposal: commons-logging.jar + log4j.jar -- or -- > commons-logging.jar + (JDK logging) > > So as I see it, it's 1 jar (current) vs. 1 or 2 jars (proposal). > > What am I missing here? > > -Thomas --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=ick [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the new InstallShield X. >From Windows to Linux, servers to mobile, InstallShield X is the one installation-authoring solution that does it all. Learn more and evaluate today! http://www.installshield.com/Dev2Dev/0504 [INVALID FOOTER]
Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
+1 on the patch. I, as well as others, could commit the changes and then we can put together a new release. - Original Message - From: "Jon Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [snip] > > Do we have a volunteer to do the conversion? I've looked at the code enough in the last week to feel comfortable making the changes.. It seems pretty straight forward. But someone else may be in a better position w/ cvs, etc. I would just submit patches. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the new InstallShield X. >From Windows to Linux, servers to mobile, InstallShield X is the one installation-authoring solution that does it all. Learn more and evaluate today! http://www.installshield.com/Dev2Dev/0504 [INVALID FOOTER]
RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
Part of my wanting to use commons logging is to use java.util.logging package. Because we're a tiny company we try to stick w/ built-in libraries when possible. Even though the jar file count would stay the same, I'm assuming the commons-logging library will change far less than log4j? Therefor one less headache when updating apps at our clients. This may all be moot because we also use Velocity and I'm looking at Baritus.. Both which have requirements on log4j. Jon > -Original Message- > From: Thomas Wheeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 1:52 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j > > I don't have an opinion either way, and no objections to > those who are in favor of the switch... but I guess I'm not > really clear on how switching to commons-logging helps the > jar file explosion. As I see it: > > Current: log4j.jar > Proposal: commons-logging.jar + log4j.jar -- or -- > commons-logging.jar + (JDK logging) > > So as I see it, it's 1 jar (current) vs. 1 or 2 jars (proposal). > > What am I missing here? > > -Thomas --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=click [INVALID FOOTER]
RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
[snip] > > Do we have a volunteer to do the conversion? I've looked at the code enough in the last week to feel comfortable making the changes.. It seems pretty straight forward. But someone else may be in a better position w/ cvs, etc. I would just submit patches. > > Jeff > > --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=click [INVALID FOOTER]
Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
A lot of OSS projects nowadays support Commons Logging instead of Log4J directly (e.g. Hibernate). So, there's a fat chance you allready have that dependency. For Maverick users who want to use JDK logging or some other mechanism they allready have a dependency on, it could mean one dependency less. Eelco - Original Message - From: "Thomas Wheeler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 8:52 PM Subject: RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j I don't have an opinion either way, and no objections to those who are in favor of the switch... but I guess I'm not really clear on how switching to commons-logging helps the jar file explosion. As I see it: Current: log4j.jar Proposal: commons-logging.jar + log4j.jar -- or -- commons-logging.jar + (JDK logging) So as I see it, it's 1 jar (current) vs. 1 or 2 jars (proposal). What am I missing here? -Thomas -Original Message- From: Eelco Hillenius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 12:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j That's what I proposed about a year ago, and I still am for replacing Log4J by Commons Logging. Eelco - Original Message - From: "Jon Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 3:56 PM Subject: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j What is everyone's opinion on changing maverick to use the Apache Commons logging API instead of hardcoding a dependency on log4j. My reason for wanting this would be to cut down on the large number of jar files my project is accumulating.. I'd like to use java.util.logging as much as possible. This would also make maverick even more flexible.. Jon Newton Scan Business Systems 800-906-7226 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=ick [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=ick [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click [INVALID FOOTER]
Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
If you'd give me commit rights I would be happy to do the dirty work ;) Eelco (sf id eelco12) - Original Message - From: "Schnitzer, Jeff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 8:33 PM Subject: RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j +1 on moving to commons-logging -1 on moving to JDK1.4 logging What problems are there running Maverick on JDK1.3? The only tricky thing is making sure you have an XML parser since it isn't builtin. The only thing preventing a move from log4j to commons-logging was the absence of anyone who actually wanted to use it that way (as opposed to a bunch of people, including myself, who just think it might be a good idea). We try to follow the XP YAGNI principle, which is why Maverick is as simple as it is. It sounds like we now have a customer for that change. Do we have a volunteer to do the conversion? Jeff > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:mav-user- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Hernandez > Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 11:11 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j > > Sure. +1 to changing package names and moving to commons logging, or java > 1.4 logging (I think we may have some problems running on 1.3 anyway, or > was > it just some of our dependencies...). > > It would probably be good to roll any good questions that have come up on > the list into the faq, and documentation. > > We should get a list of changes together, but patches are always welcome. > :) > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Moulton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > There have been a few global changes that have been pending for a > while. For instance there was the discussion of repackaging everything > to net.sf.mav.*. If I'm not mistaken there were a few other changes as > well. Maybe now would be an appropriate time to readdress some of the > changes including this logging change. > > I don't see any major problems switching to commons logging, personally > I will still use log4j. > > Thought, Jeff, Scott, Jim? > > > > > --- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g > Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. > Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click > [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=ick [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click [INVALID FOOTER]
RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
I don't have an opinion either way, and no objections to those who are in favor of the switch... but I guess I'm not really clear on how switching to commons-logging helps the jar file explosion. As I see it: Current: log4j.jar Proposal: commons-logging.jar + log4j.jar -- or -- commons-logging.jar + (JDK logging) So as I see it, it's 1 jar (current) vs. 1 or 2 jars (proposal). What am I missing here? -Thomas -Original Message- From: Eelco Hillenius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 12:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j That's what I proposed about a year ago, and I still am for replacing Log4J by Commons Logging. Eelco - Original Message - From: "Jon Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 3:56 PM Subject: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j What is everyone's opinion on changing maverick to use the Apache Commons logging API instead of hardcoding a dependency on log4j. My reason for wanting this would be to cut down on the large number of jar files my project is accumulating.. I'd like to use java.util.logging as much as possible. This would also make maverick even more flexible.. Jon Newton Scan Business Systems 800-906-7226 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=ick [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=click [INVALID FOOTER]
RE: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
+1 on moving to commons-logging -1 on moving to JDK1.4 logging What problems are there running Maverick on JDK1.3? The only tricky thing is making sure you have an XML parser since it isn't builtin. The only thing preventing a move from log4j to commons-logging was the absence of anyone who actually wanted to use it that way (as opposed to a bunch of people, including myself, who just think it might be a good idea). We try to follow the XP YAGNI principle, which is why Maverick is as simple as it is. It sounds like we now have a customer for that change. Do we have a volunteer to do the conversion? Jeff > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:mav-user- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Hernandez > Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 11:11 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j > > Sure. +1 to changing package names and moving to commons logging, or java > 1.4 logging (I think we may have some problems running on 1.3 anyway, or > was > it just some of our dependencies...). > > It would probably be good to roll any good questions that have come up on > the list into the faq, and documentation. > > We should get a list of changes together, but patches are always welcome. > :) > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Moulton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > There have been a few global changes that have been pending for a > while. For instance there was the discussion of repackaging everything > to net.sf.mav.*. If I'm not mistaken there were a few other changes as > well. Maybe now would be an appropriate time to readdress some of the > changes including this logging change. > > I don't see any major problems switching to commons logging, personally > I will still use log4j. > > Thought, Jeff, Scott, Jim? > > > > > --- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g > Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. > Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click > [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=click [INVALID FOOTER]
Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
Sure. +1 to changing package names and moving to commons logging, or java 1.4 logging (I think we may have some problems running on 1.3 anyway, or was it just some of our dependencies...). It would probably be good to roll any good questions that have come up on the list into the faq, and documentation. We should get a list of changes together, but patches are always welcome. :) - Original Message - From: "Mike Moulton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There have been a few global changes that have been pending for a while. For instance there was the discussion of repackaging everything to net.sf.mav.*. If I'm not mistaken there were a few other changes as well. Maybe now would be an appropriate time to readdress some of the changes including this logging change. I don't see any major problems switching to commons logging, personally I will still use log4j. Thought, Jeff, Scott, Jim? --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click [INVALID FOOTER]
Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
That's what I proposed about a year ago, and I still am for replacing Log4J by Commons Logging. Eelco - Original Message - From: "Jon Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 3:56 PM Subject: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j What is everyone's opinion on changing maverick to use the Apache Commons logging API instead of hardcoding a dependency on log4j. My reason for wanting this would be to cut down on the large number of jar files my project is accumulating.. I'd like to use java.util.logging as much as possible. This would also make maverick even more flexible.. Jon Newton Scan Business Systems 800-906-7226 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=ick [INVALID FOOTER] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click [INVALID FOOTER]
Re: [Mav-user] Use Apache Commons Logging instead of log4j
There have been a few global changes that have been pending for a while. For instance there was the discussion of repackaging everything to net.sf.mav.*. If I'm not mistaken there were a few other changes as well. Maybe now would be an appropriate time to readdress some of the changes including this logging change. I don't see any major problems switching to commons logging, personally I will still use log4j. Thought, Jeff, Scott, Jim? -- mike On Jun 1, 2004, at 6:56 AM, Jon Newton wrote: What is everyone's opinion on changing maverick to use the Apache Commons logging API instead of hardcoding a dependency on log4j. My reason for wanting this would be to cut down on the large number of jar files my project is accumulating.. I'd like to use java.util.logging as much as possible. This would also make maverick even more flexible.. Jon Newton Scan Business Systems 800-906-7226 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id149&alloc_id66&op=click [INVALID FOOTER] smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
