I agree with Will. Some of the "INFO" messages are inappropriate. ie: #################################### INFO - Trying to use logger class org.apache.velocity.runtime.log.SimpleLog4JLogSystem (109ms) INFO - Using logger class org.apache.velocity.runtime.log.SimpleLog4JLogSystem (109ms)
INFO - FileResourceLoader : initialization starting. <snip> INFO - FileResourceLoader : initialization complete. INFO - Default ResourceManager initializing. (class org.apache.velocity.runtime.resource.ResourceManagerImpl) (109ms) INFO - Default ResourceManager initialization complete... INFO - Velocimacro : initialization starting. (234ms) INFO - Velocimacro : initialization complete. #################################### Umm.... those are DEBUG couplets. That's like "entering method xyz" coupled with "exiting method xyz". If it *must* be INFO, use just the last one please. There are more than just these ones. #################################### INFO - Resource Loader Instantiated: #################################### Umm... ok, so the constructor worked. DEBUG! #################################### INFO - Loaded System Directive: - and - Velocimacro : someVelociMacroProperty = true #################################### You're echoing back a setting in a file (or defaults). This is DEBUG. Only when I encounter quirky or odd behaviour would I up the log4j settings to DEBUG, and at that time I want to see this info. Otherwise, I assume its all good. When my servlet container starts up, I don't expect all my settings in web.xml to be echoed back to me at an INFO level. I don't need to see my own settings echoed back. Yes, the solution is obvious. Use WARN and above for everyday use. My point is: It is unnecessarily verbose by default. I'd be obliged as well, if Will would post his code. But of course, he's under no obligation to do so. End of response proper. What appears below is the result of reading this thread last, after all the other flame-like ones that have been going on. Just ignore everything from now on if you don't want to hear about it! I know I'll be ignoring any replies to it. And just so I'm clear... that means any sentence that ends with a '?' below is being rhetorical. I do not invite a reply. Immature as that might be, I'm just getting something off my chest. ************************************************************************ Well I'm sorry to have wasted the list's time with such a picky request. Especially how it's open source, of course I should have just cracked open the source and fixed it myself. Note to Jonathan: Did you set out to make an annoying response, or was that merely a side effect? In other posts you've made clear your preference for people being exact when speaking of your replies. I'll try to do that: While reading all this, remember that it is a gestalt thing, and not any one thing in particular. It was "all together" a reply that really pissed me off and made me think you were a git, deliberate in this instance or not. >Meanwhile, this really is such a non-issue. Your use of the word 'such' translates this otherwise truthful statement into: "It's **SUCH** a non-issue <eye-roll>. If I have to hand-hold one more open source newbie, I'll scream." Your real message that "it's open source, just bring the smackdown in the form of a leading double slash" while not lost, was I dunno.. outweighed by the surrounding noise. It honestly just makes me want to ignore anything you have to say, whether on the mark, or not. > Or, IOW, if one is going to be picky at this level 'picky'. Hmm. Makes me feel real good for having dared to ask the question. I guess my concerns must really be very minor. Shame on me. > (since the extra logging messages are benign after all) 'benign'. Except I've already told you they were annoying, not malignant. > [If you download open-source...] then one should be willing to make some slight effort to address the "problem". If I'm gonna play with the big open-source boys, I should wear long pants, is that it? Who said I wasn't willing? Conversly, who says I have time to do this? Maybe I'm under deadline, and this is (after all) a minor annoyance. Maybe I asked the question because I thought perhaps someone else at some time had shared the same thought about the verbosity, and found a setting to turn it off. And the quotes around the word problem. Hmm, very subtle. I can almost see the <eyeroll> and your two hands come up and make the little "quote" signs with your two fingers. Minimize others problems, especially when *you* feel they are truly minor. > but this logging business... Trailing off, implying a knowing nudge and wink between the "people that get it" and "those that don't". It's no longer worth your time; you can't be bothered to finish sentences anymore, this "problem" is just so minor and ridiculous. Bah! I wash my hands of it! Anyways... I'm generally a level-headed person, and it takes a lot to irritate me. I also dislike flamewars, and feel somewhat chagrined that I had a small part to play in the last (current?) one. Jonathan, I don't believe you intend this effect you have. Your seem genuinely surprised when others have a bad reaction. I guess I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to point out another bad reaction. (which leaves me personally disappointed). Having said that, I'll be upset if this turns into another flame war, and so because I also believe that no one can "single-handedly" propagate a flame war, I'll leave with two things: 1) I'm not replying to any of the points below the big line of asterisks 2) I feel like I need to shower now. ;) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
