Just giving my opinion--I also recognize that the
output interface is a bit rough, as Finn was saying,
and may still need some work, possibly along the lines
of what you were suggesting.
Glen
--- Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> OK, forget it. I'm obviously worse at explaining
> thi
OK, forget it. I'm obviously worse at explaining things than I thought.
I don't have the time to chew this through. It should have been quick
and painless, but obviously it isn't. Hopefully, someone else has a
better solution.
I'm sorry for wasting your time writing this answer. Back to my JNI
wra
--- Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Finn,
>
> I took a look at it and I must say that I'm a bit
> confused, too.
>
> Anyway, I have a proposal to make. I would expect a
> command-line
> application to work like any other C-program such as
> "grep", "svn", "ls" or
> whatever. That
Hi Finn,
I took a look at it and I must say that I'm a bit confused, too.
Anyway, I have a proposal to make. I would expect a command-line
application to work like any other C-program such as "grep", "svn", "ls" or
whatever. That means you don't get any "[INFO]" before each line, but
you can defi
> The change from LogKit to Avalon Logger has happened after the 0.20.3
> release. The documentation on the website already reflects the changes
> in CVS. There's no release yet with the new logging. You could download
> the CVS-version, though.
Ok ,thx for this information, but our intranet solu
The change from LogKit to Avalon Logger has happened after the 0.20.3
release. The documentation on the website already reflects the changes
in CVS. There's no release yet with the new logging. You could download
the CVS-version, though.
> I downloaded the current source code(fop-0.20.3-src.tar.
Hi Mike,
I have committed this patch. Thanks a lot.
I think there might be a few classpaths that need updating but they can be
fixed when needed.
Thanks,
Keiron
On 2002.04.11 10:55 Michael Gratton wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> Attached is a patch for the trunk to convert it over to using Avalon
> L
Christian
> Michael Gratton wrote:
> > There was a problem with MessageHandler.error() in that patch. The
> > attached patch fixes that and makes MessageHandler.log() a bit more
> > readable. It also includes a fix for the outstanding
> > ToBeImplementedProperty problem - by using MessageHand
Michael Gratton wrote:
> There was a problem with MessageHandler.error() in that patch. The
> attached patch fixes that and makes MessageHandler.log() a bit more
> readable. It also includes a fix for the outstanding
> ToBeImplementedProperty problem - by using MessageHandler.
I've committed
Michael Gratton wrote:
>
> Attached is a patch (for the 'fop-0_20_2-maintain' branch) for
> MessageHandler
There was a problem with MessageHandler.error() in that patch. The
attached patch fixes that and makes MessageHandler.log() a bit more
readable. It also includes a fix for the outstand
> And a good one. I'm not familiar with Velocity or it's
> particular approach,
> but the basic idea of separating logging interface from logging
> implementation is sound. Components such as fop should not require a
> particular logging implementation, they should write to an interface and
> al
a
thread before log4j has initialised properly, it just writes to stdout.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Batt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:13 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: logging
When FOP is a production ready library, I wont care for any FOP logging.
Loggi
When FOP is a production ready library, I wont care for any FOP logging.
Logging in FOP now is only for debugging as far as I'm concerned. There
is no need for integration into other logging systems.
Think about how you use other libraries.
Joe
--
On Fri, 03 Aug 2001 15:34:26 Daniel Parker wrote:
> And a good one. I'm not familiar with Velocity or it's particular
> approach,
> but the basic idea of separating logging interface from logging
> implementation is sound. Components such as fop should not require a
> particular logging impleme
Keiron Liddle wrote:
>
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2001 17:45:56 Carlos Villegas wrote:
> > I think it's possible to do in FOP what was done in Velocity. They have
> > a middleware that decouples Velocity from the specific logging toolkit.
> > So they have drivers for logkit and log4j and you can even writ
On Thu, 02 Aug 2001 17:45:56 Carlos Villegas wrote:
> I think it's possible to do in FOP what was done in Velocity. They have
> a middleware that decouples Velocity from the specific logging toolkit.
> So they have drivers for logkit and log4j and you can even write your
> own one. This is a bette
Keiron Liddle wrote:
> So between logkit and log4j I think logkit is the better option simply
> because cocoon uses it. (that's the only thing that tips the balance, I'd
> rather just choose than not go anywhere.)
I think it's possible to do in FOP what was done in Velocity. They have
a middlewa
On Thu, 02 Aug 2001 08:56:55 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > Isn't logging going to be a standard part of JDK 1.4? I thought that
> was
> > going to be based on IBM's Log4J. Is Avalon's logging based on that? If
>
> > not, should the 'standard' be considered? IIRC JDK 1.4 logging includes
>
> > the
> So do others agree that this would be the way to go.
I do.
> I have one question that hopefully someone knows answer (or knows who to
> ask).
>
> Since FOP is can be run in a number of ways (command line, in servlet
> (cocoon), embedded), how can the logging be setup so that the fop logger
>
> Isn't logging going to be a standard part of JDK 1.4? I thought that was
> going to be based on IBM's Log4J. Is Avalon's logging based on that? If
> not, should the 'standard' be considered? IIRC JDK 1.4 logging includes
> the ability to log to syslog (on unix) and whatever the logging
> mec
Isn't logging going to be a standard part of JDK 1.4? I thought that was
going to be based on IBM's Log4J. Is Avalon's logging based on that? If
not, should the 'standard' be considered? IIRC JDK 1.4 logging includes
the ability to log to syslog (on unix) and whatever the logging
mechanism is
21 matches
Mail list logo
