On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 21:21 -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Simon Kitching wrote: > > > My conclusion at the end of the last round of debate on that was that > > their "enterprise logging" stuff did not belong in JCL at all. > > Such as? I think that we should support the functionality that has been > added to Java, such as tracing levels. And we should support localization.
By tracing levels you mean fine/finer/finest? That's ok as long as there is demand for it. But equally there's not much point implementing it if no-one wants to use it. I've not seen evidence for demand so far.... > Remy has already commented that we need to properly support containers. Remy mentioned that separation of logging based on TCCL is still useful (which I think we all agree on). Was there anything else under the category of "properly support containers"? > Following on Remy's comments about JULI, what do we expect JCL 2 to offer > that isn't now in standard Java logging (assuming the presence of JULI or > similar under the API)? Mainly the ability to run under java 1.1 or later. As I mentioned in my reply to Remy, I see the j.u.l API becoming the standard logging API eventually (with various LogManager implementations providing better functionality than the default logging implementation behind the scenes). However any library that wants to suport pre-1.4 JVMs must avoid j.u.l (and hence JULI) - and that's a lot of libraries. In addition, there are a lot of existing libraries that cannot be used as "backing implementations" of j.u.l, ie for which no reasonable j.u.l->lib adapters can be written. This is because JCL is a "minimal" API while j.u.l is a vastly more complicated API. In some cases, writing an adapter for j.u.l may be impossible because concepts in j.u.l don't exist in the target lib. And writing an adapter from JCL to proprietory.logging.kit is much easier than writing a j.u.l adapter for exactly the same reason. Hopefully proprietory logging kits are slowly on the way out now that there are a number of good open source ones available but.... The point of JCL is for libraries to avoid imposing any particular logging implementation on the using application. The ability to easily write adapters for arbitrary logging libs is fundamental to that. Cheers, Simon --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
