On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 15:51 +0000, Mark Proctor wrote: > We've been discussing the logging issue over in the Drools world. We > have decided not to fight against this, at some point or other as we > grow our capabilities and depend more on third party libraries we are > going to find a tool that insists on commons logging - so might as well > be now. Atleast JCI will only be used at rulebase creation time and > won't touch any of the core code. But the idea of stubs sounds good, > especially if its small and users can just rip it into their own jars > and namespace and thus avoid extra external dependencies.
the required JCL core is very small in any case. the advantage of stubbing (and static binding in general) is that users don't have to cope with the nightmare that are the various different classloading concepts found in sun specifications over the years and then try to work out what the implementation provided by container vendor actually does in practise. dynamic binding may or may not (in theory) be capable of addressing the required use cases but it's not reasonable for users to digest the advanced classloader theory required to know which of the various copies of JCL present in their various classloaders should be removed or replaced. FWIW the actual Log interface isn't too bad. the more sophisticated interface being developed by ceki as a JCL alternative plays better with modern design ideas but there isn't anything wrong with the interface. the problems arise with the gymnastics performed in order to get a log implementation quickly in containers with complex classloaders. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
