On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:58, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> Peter,
>
> This one is easy to debunk. The idea of mapped diagnostic context was
> on the table for a long time. Please see:
>
> Mail dated June 12, 2001:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/log4j-user@jakarta.apache.org/msg01446.html
>
> The idea was first exposed in a mail dated 24th of January, 2001.
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=log4j-dev&m=98051571516266&w=2
>
> These are no opinions, just facts. I hope you will admit that.
kool - should have called me a thief then.
> The same applies to supporting security. We did not make any
> SecurityManager checks because of the need to preserve JDK 1.1
> compatibility. When we move to an architecture where Logger is just an
> interface with different underlying implementations, then we can make
> security checks in one implementation and not the other.
SecurityManagers have little to do with secure programming and information
hiding.
> Your claims about security, performance, reliability and so
> on are totally unsubstantiated. That is just my opinion.
Yes and a opinion surely grounded in fact.
> ps: Charles Darwin in his seminal book "The Origin of Species" observed
> that competition between similar species was the fiercest. I think we have
> an example of that today.
Amusing. There is no competition. It would be foolish to enter into
competition in a dead-end market. In 2-3 years people will look back at
Log4j/LogKit/LogV2/other the same way that people look back at JGL.
--
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
* "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, *
* and proving that there is no need to do so - almost *
* everyone gets busy on the proof." *
* - John Kenneth Galbraith *
*-----------------------------------------------------*
