I am just thinking back to the last time that I used Log4J without initializing it. It complains. I will look into it and report back. I agree in general that Log4J should have some default config.
Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 12:09 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: RE: cvs commit: > jakarta-commons/logging/src/java/org/apache/commons/loggingJdk > 14Logger.java LogSource.java package.html > > > > > On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, Scott Sanders wrote: > > > Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 11:20:41 -0800 > > From: Scott Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: RE: cvs commit: > > jakarta-commons/logging/src/java/org/apache/commons/logging > > Jdk14Logger.java LogSource.java package.html > > > > Do we need something more than just checking for the class > in Log4J. > > Isn't there some way to see if it has been configured? > Wouldn't that > > be better? > > > > Not necessarily. > > Doesn't Log4J have a default configuration? (If it doesn't, > it should). > > If the application doesn't want to use Log4J for logging, it > shouldn't be on the classpath at all. On the other hand, if > the classes *are* there, then the configuration file should > have been put in the right place also. > > Trying to build logging-package-specific knowledge like this > into a "thin" wrapper layer seems like a slippery slope. > > > Scott > > Craig > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:commons-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For > additional commands, > e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
