--- Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Finn, > > I took a look at it and I must say that I'm a bit > confused, too. > > Anyway, I have a proposal to make. I would expect a > command-line > application to work like any other C-program such as > "grep", "svn", "ls" or > whatever. That means you don't get any "[INFO]" > before each line, but > you can define the log level (normally "quiet", > "normal" and "verbose") > through command line switches. That'll work for most > CLI-users. >
Errr, we're using Commons-Logging now. I don't think we should wrap it. Perhaps we should switch to System.out/.err for Command Line use though, a la Xalan. > That would probably mean > not to use > SimpleLog but to provide a special implementation > for command-line use. SimpleLog is out the window with 1.4 JDK--C-L uses Java Logging by default there, which IIRC, doesn't have those messages, or if it does can be configured by the underlying implementation. No architectural decisions IMO should be based on the behavior of SimpleLog--it's yesterday's news. Remember, Xalan, Xerces, and Batik don't use logging, and I see FOP moving in this direction--logging less and less over time. > For those who know about C-L and want to do some > special logging we > could have a command line switch that disables our > special logger setup. > They can fully control C-L from outside. > We don't do much for the user community in separating them from C-L (a highly useful skill, its not like we're forcing them to learn Icelandic), and having them learn another nonportable logger implementation instead. Ideally, if there's problems with C-L complexity the solution should be to go to C-L team and complain on the user's lists or send Bugzilla reports to get those problems fixed. Not for each of the 90 or so open-source systems that use C-L to be wrapping it instead. Glen
