> As appeared to be generally agreed upon, HTTP client shouldn't
> have dependencies with log4j
Not that such a vote is particularly meaningful here (at least as I understand it), but I counted at least three +1s for the log4j support.
> (Rodney, do you plan to revert that part of your latest patch ?)
If I must. What I'd really like to do is replace with some lightweight (pluggable?) logging mechanism that is agreeable to everyone and supports log4j (and potentially other logging mechanisms as well). I think that would meet everyone's needs as I understand them. Failing that I guess we either rip out logging entirely or go back to stdout/stderr logging except provide a built-in way to turn it on and off via a property setting.
