I was thinking the integration would be needed by extensions (SPI) as
opposed to apps. My initial inclination is to limit the number of
things we expose but if someone feels strongly to keep it there I'm
probably not going to object because it will save me the trouble of
refactoring it out.
Jim
On Aug 27, 2006, at 3:44 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Why restrict to just system stuff? Apps can still use log4j or
jsr47 if they want but by making @Monitor available to them they
can also integrate with Tuscany's framework.
--
Jeremy
On Aug 27, 2006, at 3:38 PM, Jim Marino wrote:
My slight preference is to err on the side of caution and just
have it for system stuff now. For apps, I'd just recommend Log4J
and use an appender to pipe messages where they need to go.
Jim
On Aug 27, 2006, at 3:14 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Aug 23, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Jim Marino wrote:
O.K. I'll add this into API. Looking at the API package, I'm not
sure why @Monitor is defined there as I think that should be in
SPI. I believe Jeremy moved it there, so I'll have to ask him.
I thought it might be used by application code as well.
--
Jeremy
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
