Peter Royal wrote: > > At 11:04 AM 9/18/2001 -0400, you wrote: > >1) Simply replace the Loggable and AbstractLoggable classes with the proposed > > version. This causes a backwards incompatibility, and is not preffered. > > I prefer this. Yes, it breaks compatibility, but I value a meaningful name > over the break. (In my own self-centered view of the world, we have yet to > ship our C2/Avalon product, so it won't cause me any headaches)
I hear your point, and will pass it to Avalon-dev. I want as much input as we can. > As another alternative, org.apache.log.Logger is a class right now, what if > that was made into an interface and used as the basis for the new common > logging interface? Would that alleviate the need to change any existing > code? I may be completely off base with that thought, but I figured I'd > toss it out there. > -pete I don't agree with this assessment. LogKit is it's own entity--Framework is what is (potentially) providing a wrapper for the logging implementation. For that reason, the wrapping interfaces/adapters need to be in Framework and not LogKit. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
