At the risk of quibbling, I would dispute this as a general rule; commons-logging is great for library packages which may be used in a variety of contexts, but unless you're writing a Struts application for general distribution and re-use, there's less justification for using commons-logging universally.
There's nothing wrong with using commons-logging in applications and other more finished products, but commons-logging is a greatly simplified API (for good reason) and in an application, you may find it worthwhile to commit to a more sophisticated logging tool (like Log4J) in order to have more powerful logging features.
Are you talking about the code-level interface (i.e. Log versus Logger) or in terms of the configuration? Because in our applications, we've taken the commons-logging approach, though we initialize the commons-logging package with a complex Log4J configuration, so that we have in essence the best of both worlds: we can use the behind-the-scenes power of Log4j, with the ability to swap out logging implementations that commons-logging gives us.
I've not seen much in the log-level API that's substantially different. What sorts of power are you talking about?
Kirk Wylie M7 Corporation
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
