Carsten Ziegeler said: > Giacomo Pati wrote: > >> >> If the logger abstraction you mentioned is the Avalon LogEnabled one >> than yes, we will still have to support that for backward compatability. >> > Of course we will support LogEnabled - with the only difference that you > always get a wrapper around a Log4J (or whatever we decide) logger.
What do you mean by "always"? I thought that we switched the default from logkit to log4j a while ago? What more is needed? Ralph
