Paco Nathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>One thing to keep in mind about log4j is that it's more mature and yet
>progressing faster than Sun's logging package in Java. For example,
>java.util.logging in JDK 1.4 hasn't reached anywhere close to the level
>of support provided by log4j Adapters. If an application has real
>needs for notification/remediation/trouble-ticketing, that can become a
>sore spot for system integration. Many other projects use log4j, so if
>you integrate use of Torque along with other systems, it pays to keep a
>common ground for logging. More about that at:
>http://wiki.apache.org/logging-log4j/Log4jvsJDKLogging
>To add to Scott's note about JDK support ... I'm working on an open
>source project which has JDK 1.4 as a dependency, and we've found this
>exact point to be one of our biggest hurdles for cross-platform
>adoption. For example, FreeBSD is just barely offering a stable
>alternative for a 1.4 compiler.
We use commons-logging and try to be log-engine agnostic. You can
use any log engine that is supported by commons-logging.
Please don't quote Cekis paper again. Personally I disagree with it.
Regards
Henning
--
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen INTERMETA GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 9131 50 654 0 http://www.intermeta.de/
RedHat Certified Engineer -- Jakarta Turbine Development -- hero for hire
Linux, Java, perl, Solaris -- Consulting, Training, Development
"Fighting for one's political stand is an honorable action, but re-
fusing to acknowledge that there might be weaknesses in one's
position - in order to identify them so that they can be remedied -
is a large enough problem with the Open Source movement that it
deserves to be on this list of the top five problems."
-- Michelle Levesque, "Fundamental Issues with
Open Source Software Development"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
