On Friday 21 May 2004 17:12, J�rg Hohwiller wrote:
Hi there,
I am new to this list but have been using avalon + ECM in a project before and plan to use avalon + merlin for my current open-source project.
I can see there is commons-configuration (which seems as it came from
avalon) and commons-logging.
I think commons configuration came from Turbine (but I'm not sure).
I saw in the archive that there was a discussion about logkit vs. commons-logging + log4j before. I would like to know if you are planning to directly use c-configuration and c-logging in the avalon framework API?
No plans and I can't see it happening. The Framework api Logger and Configuration interfaces classes provide what is needed. However, you can still use commons-logging and commons-configuration as part of a component model by creating a lifecycle extension.
I personally think the commons initiative is a great thing and I can still remember myself digging deep in apache projects sources to find a ready to use cache, pool or whatever implementation. Now why not just using these APIs as part of the avalon API?
It would break the 4.X API with no tangible benefit - in fact it could be argued that the end-result would be less valuable as commons configuration and avalon configuration are very different animals.
I can see that changing an API this way in general is a bad thing because of loosing downward compatibility but on the other hand it is not a bid thing to replace org.apache.avalon.framework.configuration to org.apache.commons.configuration and org.apache.avalon.framework.logger to org.apache.commons.logging (okay the last one is not just a string replace).
Commons Logging is about providing an abstraction layer above one or more logging implementations. This is basically what the Avalon Logging system is doing. The difference between Avalon Logging and Common Logging is that Avalon Logging provides support for dynamically loaded logging strategies.
A second issue is that the commons logging implementation classes and API are not separated. This results in the exposure of logging system management apis to the client (which is not desirable).
Cheers, Stephen.
Instead one could use adaptors that do the thing (I think there is one available for configuration) but now if you want to use a specific implementation of lets say c-configuration that allows also changing parts of the configuration, etc. you can not access those features across such an adaptor.
So all I am suggesting is think about it. Disscussions welcome...
Take care J�rg
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
|---------------------------------------| | Magic by Merlin | | Production by Avalon | | | | http://avalon.apache.org | |---------------------------------------|
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
