Oh? I didn't notice that - perhaps I missed it in the source? If that's the case I feel down-right stupid :-O

Wouldn't it be simpler to just use commons-logging period though? ... and not have to deal with any logging details inside of OJB?

Matthew Baird wrote:

OJB supports commmons logging, our own logging implementation, and log4j. What more could you ask for?

-----Original Message-----
From: Eddie Bush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 3:23 PM
To: OJB Users List
Subject: commons-logging


I was just curious why OJB continues to use it's own home-brewed logging strategy over commons-logging. Anyone know? That's about the only thing I dislike about it - makes me deal with two different logging setups.

Thanks :-)

--
Eddie Bush



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to