On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, [iso-8859-1] Paul Hammant wrote:
> > [..] to choose between log4j, LogKit, > > commons-logging or even JDK1.4-Logging? > > There is also logging delivered by Avalon-Framework. I thought that was LogKit Paul? > > My personal view is that the makers of reusable components should not > log at all and the the logging choice (log4J directly or one of the > abstractions here) is the preserve of the application maker (uses many > components). Which doesn't really work with reusable components. The developer who uses lots of reusable components has to work with larger, more opaque objects, while the developer who codes anew each time has tight, focused logging. My view has been that an application should use util.log if in 1.4, Log4j otherwise [or LogKit, I just lack experience with it]. A pre 1.4 reusable component should use commons-logging. A post 1.4 reusable component should use util.log. Someone had told me that Log4j was/will-be pluggable behind util.log (?) Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
