> -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Auftrag > von Berin Loritsch > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2004 15:58 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: Re: AW: [RT] Logging in Cocoon > >
<snip/> > > which abstraction exactly? the Logger interface is more or less the same > > when compared to logkit's Logger. > > The Avalon approach--only because of the lack of dynamic setup/ > configuration. It is all completely explicit. I agree and I have nothing against logkit, I've been using it all the time (through cocoon). > > >>What's wrong with commons logging? Nothing if you have a standalone > >>application. However, it uses classpath discovery to determine if > >>you have LogKit, Log4J, JDK 1.4 logging, and where the logging > > > > it can use classpath discovery, but it can also be explicitly configured > > IIRC. > > Perhaps that came out of his constant urging. As long as it can be > configured explicitly I have no problems. However, black magic should > be avoided if at all possible. > > >>I don't have all the links right now, but suffice it to say that > >>Commons Logging uses black magic to set everything up at startup. > > > > as mentioned it can use 'black magic' but it doesn't depend on it. > > As long as we don't use the black magic, I am fine. Building on sand > is bad, as we all know. I totally agree and I think that the configuration (which implementation, implementation's config, etc.) is the core issue.
