On 10/8/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I wonder if we should not create our own very simple logging > interface, as Brian suggests in his blog, to allow client code to use > the library of their choice. > > We'd define a very simple Tika-specific logging interface, provide an > implementation that logs to stderr, and allow client code to wrap any > other logger as they see fit. > > That would allow us to remove all logging dependencies (unless the > parsers that we use require logging libs themselves, of course). > > WDYT?
A couple of thoughts: 1) would this mess up logging that displays the class method? Example: Oct 9, 2007 1:13:23 AM org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher warm INFO: autowarming result for [EMAIL PROTECTED] main Now would they all say Oct 9, 2007 1:13:23 AM org.apache.tika.util.LogWrapper log 2) if you go this route, be sure to include an isLoggable(level)... some log messages are expensive to construct. I know JDK logging supports this, do other common log libs? 3) throw exceptions whenever possible instead of logging (small libs should probably avoid logging altogether) -Yonik
