>I think that's the main case in this whole discussion - it isn't about >users and what kind of logging library they are using. That aspect >must stay as is, users cannot notice any change. Exact the user should be able to use any logging framework he want to choose. But if Log4j2 facade provides this feature why not use it?
Logging itself is not our business or am I wrong? ################################################# web: http://www.jgeppert.com twitter: http://twitter.com/jogep 2014-06-06 10:21 GMT+02:00 Lukasz Lenart <lukaszlen...@apache.org>: > 2014-06-06 10:12 GMT+02:00 Christoph Nenning < > christoph.nenn...@lex-com.net>: > >> > >> This onyx stuff looks like a advantage and may some developer likes it > > and > >> some not. > >> For me it looks like a maybe usefully feature for the users but may not > > on > >> the web framework site. > > > > > > Please keep in mind that users are not affected by onyx. Applications can > > still choose their own logging facade. Onyx would just be visible to > > struts committers and contributers. > > I think that's the main case in this whole discussion - it isn't about > users and what kind of logging library they are using. That aspect > must stay as is, users cannot notice any change. > > Onyx will be used only internally, inside Struts and it will depend on > whatever users has chosen as a logging library, so it must adjust > itself to users' choice (the same as it's now) > > > Regards > -- > Łukasz > + 48 606 323 122 http://www.lenart.org.pl/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@struts.apache.org > >
