Not sure if I'm just repeating what Robbie just said, but what about also having a common log/trace infrastructure/abstraction between SCA, SDO and DAS, and we could provide a default implementation using a standard log framework (e.g log4J or java native log support) and allow user to customize it by implementing a specific interface and registering/loading it somehow ?
I think today we have : -SCA http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg01492.html http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg00454.html SDO http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg06377.html DAS http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg06398.html If people think we could/should have a common framework, I could take a quick look and provide a draft design for discussion. - Luciano On 8/18/06, Robbie Minshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What do people think about providing various aspects to weave in log statements for various frameworks. That way a user could weave in the logging statements of their choice without a complicated infrastructure. . . . thoughts ? Robbie On 8/15/06, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm not sure you would want to use the entire thing as is since it > makes use of the IoC engine. I would maybe look at the interfaces in > org.apache.tuscany.spi.monitor and see if you can use those, > providing your own mechanism for injecting a monitor into various > classes. There was also a write-up n the Wiki as I recall that > explains further. > > Jim > > > > > On Aug 15, 2006, at 11:48 AM, Luciano Resende wrote: > > > Hi Jeremy > > > > What you guys did for SCA, is that something that could be used > > across > > other components on the project (e.g.: SDO/DAS) ? Or is something > > specific > > to SCA ? Could you point us where in the code to look for that ? > > > > - Luciano > > > > On 8/15/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> It doesn't matter which logging framework you pick, it will be the > >> wrong one :-) > >> What I mean is that, as a library, you don't get to pick which > >> logging framework the application that is using you chose. This > >> provides a problem where log messages from the library may end up > >> routed separately from the user's messages, or where the user needs > >> to maintain multiple logging configurations. > >> > >> What we did in the SCA runtime is externalize logging. Any of our > >> components can define a monitor interface that is independent of a > >> logging framework. The runtime (not the user code) provides an > >> implementation of that interface that forwards monitoring events to a > >> logging framework that is provided by the user when they boot the > >> runtime. > >> > >> There have been a few discussion on the list and I think on the wiki > >> about our Monitoring Framework and MonitorFactory - it might be worth > >> looking for those and see if they would work for DAS. > >> > >> -- > >> Jeremy > >> > >> On Aug 15, 2006, at 9:26 AM, Darius Dejesus wrote: > >> > >> > I've been looking at some of the older JIRA's, and upon looking at > >> > the way > >> > logging was currently handled in the DAS, inconsistent at best, I > >> > figured > >> > now would be a good time to throw some questions out there. I > >> > believe this > >> > falls under Tucsany-292 and Tuscany-441. > >> > > >> > As it stands I'm wondering what logging framework would be best for > >> > the > >> > project. At this point I've been looking at the libraries contained > >> > in both > >> > org.apache.log4j and those found in java.util.logging. While I'm > >> > aware that > >> > log4j is more robust, I'm wondering if it's all needed for these > >> > purposes. > >> > Not having any prior experiences with either of these logging > >> > libraries, I'm > >> > not clear on any extra overhead or other possible issues they may > >> > have. > >> > > >> > I'm also curious as to the overall goals of the logging system. I > >> > imagine > >> > this is more for the user then for us, so in that case all message, > >> > exceptions and what not should probably be separated and organized > >> > in some > >> > standard way or place ( some logging/debugging directory perhaps ). > >> > Also do > >> > any of the other subprojects already have some form of logging in > >> > place? > >> > Should we all be using the same standards and files? > >> > > >> > Thats all I'm wondering about so far. I appreciate any feedback. > >> > > >> > -Darius DeJesus > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Luciano Resende > > SOA Opensource - Apache Tuscany > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- * * * Charlie * * * Check out some pics of little Charlie at http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/sets/ * * * Addresss * * * 1914 Overland Drive Chapel Hill NC 27517 * * * Number * * * 919-225-1553
-- ----------------------------------------------------- Luciano Resende SOA Opensource - Apache Tuscany -----------------------------------------------------
