On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Jon Stevens wrote:
> In the end, I think the discussion about the Logging wrapper comes back to
> whether or not people are ok with binding themselves to Log4J.
>
> Personally, I think that this worry that Craig expressed about people not
> liking Log4J is un-substantiated red herring FUD (correct me with real
> examples)
>
Somebody needs to go back and read his own arguments before JVZ
convinced his they were wrong ...
Personally, I don't think any of the current Commons components are big
enough to need anything more than System.out debug messages (which is why
I was able to stay out of this stupid argument for so long), but that's
just my opinion.
But I'm done talking about it ... see next message for a [VOTE] request.
> and the reasons are:
>
> #1. Ceki has stated that Log4J will support JDK 1.4 Logging API's when they
> are released. When that happens, people can switch out Log4J anyways.
>
> #2. Log4J allows people's existing code to be used through custom Appenders.
> People will need to write their own "Appenders" if they use a Logging
> wrapper anyway.
>
> #3. This is the Jakarta project. We should eat our own dog food as much as
> possible. If people don't like Log4J and refuse to use our software because
> we do like it, then that is their problem, not ours.
>
> p.s. I'm putting Costin's *valid* issues with Log4J on the wayside right now
> because I think that those are issues which can be resolved and are not
> necessarily design issues with Log4J itself. They are important, but they
> can be solved.
>
> -jon
>
>
Craig
