Thanks for the replies. I would like to summarize. There seem to be three basic views:
1) There is no problem (Ceki G�lc�, Anders Kristensen) 2) Binary compatibility should be maintained to some extent, the question is how (John Armstrong, Doug, Sean Hager, Niclas Hedhman, Paul Duffin) 3) Work round it (Scott Miller) (Sorry if I have interpreted anyone's views incorrectly - [Scott says that a standard interface wrapper around log4j would be nice - so perhaps he is in camp (2) with an "ideally" after the "should"]) I don't really know how to progress from here. I need to make a decision about what to do about log4j. Probably in the next month or so I will decide whether to stick with log4j or implement some work around/replacement. What are the timescales for making a decision on this issue? And if the decision is to go for some form of binary compatibility what are the timescales for deciding exactly what form that binary compatibility will take (i.e. when will the API be designed)? John P.S. I will be incommunicado for about 1 week, please do not think that I have lost interest in this question just because I stop participating for a while. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
