Michael Gratton wrote:
[..]
Anyway, a preliminary, but fully functional patch against the
fop-0_20_3 branch can be found here:
http://web.vee.net/fop/AvalonLogger-patch-20020315.jar. I just need to
Committed.
Mike.
Christian
Michael Gratton wrote:
[..]
Out of curiosity, what was the name of that branch? Keiron mentioned
elsewhere that I'd probably want to patch both branches - one is
obviously going to be HEAD, the other I assumed was MAIN, but I'm not so
sure now..
You get the maintenance branch with co -r
I meant just the cvs HEAD and the branch you are working on.
On 2002.03.15 08:52 Michael Gratton wrote:
Cool, will do.
Out of curiosity, what was the name of that branch? Keiron mentioned
elsewhere that I'd probably want to patch both branches - one is
obviously going to be HEAD, the
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
[..]
That's a good point. Since I have a day off tomorrow and Michael is
doing the logging stuff, I might look into the issue if FOP and JAXP
might be able to get a bit closer together.
I have already a JAXP patch from Joerg, I just had no time to apply it
yet (I hope
Keiron Liddle wrote:
If you submit a patch for this it will be committed before you know it!
Excellent!
No-one else has mentioned working on it so go ahead. It will probably
need to be done on both branches but do whatever you want to.
Right, I'll get onto it, then.
Jeremias
Hey Jeremias,
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
I can help you with implementing or documenting, whatever you want.
Thanks for the offer, and thanks for the pointers. It's too late for me
start this now, I'll do it at work tomorrow (about 16hrs away) - gotta
love getting paid to work on OS
Hey Michael
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
I can help you with implementing or documenting, whatever you want.
Thanks for the offer, and thanks for the pointers. It's too late for me
start this now, I'll do it at work tomorrow (about 16hrs away) - gotta
love getting paid to work on OS
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
I'd extend Driver from AbstractLogEnabled and overwrite getLogger()
as done in the current version (maintbranch).
Cool, will do.
Out of curiosity, what was the name of that branch? Keiron mentioned
elsewhere that I'd probably want to patch both branches - one is
Hey Jeremias,
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Right, I think we agree here.
Cool.
I'm exactly proposing this. I suggest you really have a look at Avalon.
Avalon is very far from being another large library. Avalon Framework is
46K, LogKit is about 52K. Is that large?
Okay, my two large
Joe Batt wrote:
Given the above is true, you could use something as simple as printlns
to s global print writer. In debug mode it would go to the bit bucket.
OK, I've used log4j, so I understand you may want something a little
more substantial than that, but why does the user care to
Joe
So you would be one of the users who will be simply using some kind of /dev/null
logger (like org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.NullLogger). What we're
discussing here will enable you to just do that: Switch of logging
messages if you don't want them.
(I am a user of FOP, not an active
On 2002.03.13 12:25 Joe Batt wrote:
Logging within FOP is for debugging FOP. It doesn't need to integrate
with anything. As a user of FOP, I want it to be silent, just like my
JDBC driver is silent, just like my AWT layer is silent, just like my
messaging driver is silent. As a
Sigh, this is getting long, please bear with me here.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Ok, let's look at it that way: With your reasoning people who *can't*
use Avalon *can't* use Cocoon, for example. But Cocoon only uses Avalon
internally.
Err, as an application framework unto itself, I would have
Hi Michael
Sigh, this is getting long, please bear with me here.
It doesn't make so much sense go on a lot further, but to make things
clear about Avalon and LogKit, I think I have to explain something about
Avalon:
There's LogKit, a logging facility, similar to Log4J for example. It has
a
On 2002.03.14 08:29 Michael Gratton wrote:
If I write a patch to move FOP over to Avalon's Logger, will that patch
get comitted? Or is someone already working on it? Is there a schedule
for this?
If you submit a patch for this it will be committed before you know it!
No-one else has
Keiron Liddle wrote:
If you submit a patch for this it will be committed before you know it!
Excellent!
No-one else has mentioned working on it so go ahead. It will probably
need to be done on both branches but do whatever you want to.
Right, I'll get onto it, then.
Jeremias mentioned
If you can do it and it will be an improvement then I welcome your input.
I think the are three possibilities:
- use a generic logging package such as found in avalon, it is quite
possible to use the LogkitLogger, Log4JLogger and Jdk14Logger
- use an interface
- use methods on the user agent
Logging is one thing. Error handling (like layout problems, image that
can't be found etc.) is another. Right?
Logging: I'd go for the Avalon Logger interface which lets us freely
choose the logging backend. We can even use the new ConsoleLogger or
even NullLogger. :-)
Error handling: We had a
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Logging is one thing. Error handling (like layout problems, image that
can't be found etc.) is another. Right
As much as it at the moment. Obviously, errors need to be reported, and
the most convenient way to do that is via a logging mechanism. In
addition, it's often
Michael
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Logging is one thing. Error handling (like layout problems, image that
can't be found etc.) is another. Right
As much as it at the moment. Obviously, errors need to be reported, and
the most convenient way to do that is via a logging mechanism. In
Guys, I've just encountered this issue, so apologies for barging in late..
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Joerg Pietschmann wrote:
In order to clarify issues: I have to use FOP in an environment
which already provides logging, configuration management and life
cycle management. I don't want to
From: Joerg Pietschmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I think that can be done, even when using Avalon in FOP. You propose
(I think) that we could provide an Avalon-Wrapper around FOP,
Thanks for the help.
Some comments on the concerns: I'm forced to use
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've used Avalon framework in many projects, and IMHO it's not heavyweight.
Ok, scratch the heavyweight.
In order to clarify issues: I have to use FOP in an environment
which already provides logging, configuration management and life
cycle
In order to clarify issues: I have to use FOP in an environment
which already provides logging, configuration management and life
cycle management. I don't want to look into another log file. I
don't want to write more config files. (There is also the fact
that said environment goes to great
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Using Avalon/Logkit
In order to clarify issues: I have to use FOP in an environment
which already provides logging, configuration management and life
cycle management. I don't want to look into another log file. I
don't want to write more config
One of the major criteria of a logging system is the minimal impact on
performance. Surely having abstraction layers and implementation layers to
provide logging will have an impact on this.
There's almost no performance penalty. Most performance is lost because
developers don't write their
Could the Avalon jar shipped with Fop include
org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.Log4JLogger and
org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.Logger so it's easy for us to use log4j?
It's only a few kb extra and it means that we don't have to have lots of
avalon jars in the classpath, or have
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 7:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Using Avalon/Logkit
Could the Avalon jar shipped with Fop include
org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.Log4JLogger and
org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.Logger so it's easy for us
to use
From: Joerg Pietschmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've used Avalon framework in many projects, and IMHO it's not
heavyweight.
Ok, scratch the heavyweight.
In order to clarify issues: I have to use FOP in an environment
which already provides logging,
I just tried to plug in fop .20.3 to an existing app that uses .20.2. I
included the new avalon jar in my classpath, but I still get a logging
error. From an end user persepective, I would just like to suggest that when
you add a new component between non-version build changes that breaks the
From: Joerg Pietschmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By the way: What's the current agreement whether to use Avalon or not? I
mean, we're already using LogKit (which is cool).
No, it's not cool unless done properly. I don't think users
who want only pure FO
31 matches
Mail list logo
