The discovery process is a concern. It's not trivial. It only gets worse over time. Enough said.
To be quite frank, here is what I believe to be the right strategy 1. Implement a "workable" discovery mechanism where it belongs... in Commons Discovery. 2. Have the existing LogFactory attempt to use Commons Discovery, and failing that fall back to... 3. Clean up [for 2.0] the LogFactory mechanisms... simplify, simplify, simplify... minimize, minimize.. I'm advocating regressive behavior with this statement. This is necessary to "fix" the problems we had with 1.0.x. If you *want* solid discovery, the price should be bringing that it your environment. I think a simple J2SE [single classloader] discovery is reasonable for the LogFactory, should hit the 80% user mark. For those that want the 20%, let's please solve the problem in Discovery, and resist duplicating the solution in many Jakarta components. <ras> simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 12/09/2004 05:18:37 PM: > On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 11:52, Martin Cooper wrote: > > This sure doesn't sound like Commons Logging would be "an ultra-thin > > bridge between different logging libraries" any more. > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/logging/ > > > > This sounds more like a different package altogether. IMO, we have > > enough trouble as it is with some people resisting adding a dependency > > on Commons Logging that the last thing I want to see is a bunch more > > functionality - and size - added to this component. > > It looks to me like the changes will be just a couple of fairly simple > new classes for globalisation, and a couple of trivial methods to > support the JSR-47 "finer" log level. I don't think that's a big deal. > > The "repackaging" of the logging library to separate the "interfaces" > from the log-library-specific adapters is something that has already > been proposed on this list, and clearly will *reduce* jar file size > (though add complexity by forcing users to deploy two jars instead of > one). > > It is less clear how the proposed changes to the 'discovery' process > would affect code size/complexity, and I agree a close eye needs to be > kept on this to make sure commons-logging stays the "thin bridge" it was > always meant to be. > > Regards, > > Simon > ******************************************* Richard A. Sitze IBM WebSphere WebServices Development --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
