On Wed, 2002-12-11 at 10:37, Quinton McCombs wrote: > One of the largest drawbacks to using Turbine is the complexity. Having > to configure three different logging systems is a problem. This needs > to be simplified. > > I would agree that the immediate concern would be to decide on a logging > system within Turbine first. However, we also need to think about how > we can get everything using the same system. When I say the same > system, I mean a common wrapper. > > There will be users that will want to use log4j. There will be others > that want to use the jdk1.4 implementation. There might be a few that > want some other logging system but that should be a very small > percentage. The only solution that I have heard on this list that will > allow the user to choose between log4j and jdk logging is > commons-logging. > > I know nothing about the avalon logging. Is it a wrapper like > commons-logging or is it a logging mechanism of its own?
The Logger class from Avalon-Framework is an abstraction just like commons-logging Log and gives the same benefit. The LogEnabled interface allows a logger to be provided to a component rather than requested by it (inversion of control). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
