: I'd be in favor seeing is how I spent a good bit of time 2 months ago : writing JUL handlers and log managers to forward log messages to our logging
Have you considered contributing your LogManager and Handlers to log4j so other people can benefit from the work you've done? : framework (log4j). Pretty much any alternative (Commons, Log4j, SLF4J) is : better since all of them allow you to _configure_ your underlying : implementation (including JUL if that's what you're into). JUL on the other : hand ~requires you to write code to switch logging implementations or even this comment doens't make any sense to me ... the java.util.logging.manager system property let's you specify any implementation you want for your JVM, and the implentation can be as configurable as it wants to be. How is that requiring you to write code to switch the implementation? If you mean "i have to write code to create a logging implementation" then yes ... that is true ... someone, somewhere, has to write an implementation of the JDK Logging API in order for you to use that implentation -- and if you don't like any of the other implentations out there, then you might have to write your own. :) That's always been my biggest complain about JDK logging .. the API is very good, and the "sample" implentation provided by default is just usable enough that no one bothers writing a better implementation (with more robust configuration) but it's not good enough to keep people from complaining about it and putting a lot of effort into building/maintaining other logging frameworks. -Hoss
