Carsten Ziegeler <cziegeler <at> s-und-n.de> writes: > > Unico Hommes wrote: > > > > Carsten Ziegeler <cziegeler <at> s-und-n.de> writes: > > > > > So, my suggestion is to: > > > - deprecate the use of LogKit > > > > -0.5 > >
<snip to make gmane happy/> > > > Yes, that's true. My initial post was a little bit unclear :) > The basic idea is to use log4j as default and provide perhaps > a little bit more support for configuration of log4j - whatever > that require. Of course you still will be able to use logkit > if you want (so "deprecating" was a wrong term, sorry). > I am very happy to hear that :-) Thanks for clarifying. Having better support for log4j is definately a pro. And I am interested to see once more people start using it more how it compares to Logkit in Cocoon. > For the status of logkit, well, currently it's called "legacy" at > Avalon (please correct me, if I'm telling something wrong here). > As far as I remember, the idea is to not continue the development > of Logkit anymore. I see, and I understand the decision since there is now a logging TLP and logging should not be Avalon's concern anyway. Perhaps there is a place for Logkit at logging.apache.org. > But I think this is not a problem as Logkit > is working well and is "finished". There is no real need for > further development. Exactly my point. I don't remember ever having any problems with it. If people want a feature not supported by LogKit they can use Log4j. -- Unico
