Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
We didn't fork. Any commons project should work with all projects to find a common solution that all would switch to. This hasn't been done, and is happening now with configuration. We have a Configuration system, and commons configuration is still going its way. We'll see if it comes out similarly to logging.on 2002/12/10 5:22 PM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:There are technical points that Avalon logging pursues that are missing from Commons Logging.The point being that you should work in the Commons project to get them added instead of coming up with another logging interface and using that. Sure, you have the right to fork, but it shouldn't be the first thing that happens.
Avalon is a server framework. You mean that logging is not to be a concern of a server framework?And it's sensible that projects that use the Avalon framework use the Logging that is part of the framework, I don't see the "pushing" part you refer to.It is not sensible to me. It is a terrible idea in fact. If you say you care about good design, then you won't base all of your decisions around using Avalon for things that really don't belong in Avalon.
Oh well...
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
