Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-21 Thread robert burrell donkin
On Tuesday, October 21, 2003, at 08:04 AM, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: For classes inside, consistency with past practice overwhelms any principle about the desireability of the practice--otherwise, you totally screw up any existing Digester user that expects his or her current log settings to

Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-21 Thread robert burrell donkin
On Monday, October 20, 2003, at 10:46 PM, Simon Kitching wrote: On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 10:29, robert burrell donkin wrote: On Sunday, October 5, 2003, at 10:53 PM, Simon Kitching wrote: Hmm .. but calling Digester.setLogger probably doesn't override the object known to the LogFactory... What exac

Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-20 Thread Craig R. McClanahan
Simon Kitching wrote: On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 11:26, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: Simon Kitching wrote: Regarding your "tomcat" example, I will have to have a think about this. I'm no expert on complex container architectures, nor on Tomcat, so if you and the Avalon team say the setLog() appro

Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-20 Thread Simon Kitching
On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 11:26, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > Simon Kitching wrote: Regarding your "tomcat" example, I will have to have a think about this. I'm no expert on complex container architectures, nor on Tomcat, so if you and the Avalon team say the setLog() approach is the only way to go, I

Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-20 Thread Craig R. McClanahan
Simon Kitching wrote: On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 10:29, robert burrell donkin wrote: On Sunday, October 5, 2003, at 10:53 PM, Simon Kitching wrote: Hmm .. but calling Digester.setLogger probably doesn't override the object known to the LogFactory... What exactly is the purpose of being able

Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-20 Thread Simon Kitching
On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 10:29, robert burrell donkin wrote: > On Sunday, October 5, 2003, at 10:53 PM, Simon Kitching wrote: > > > > > Hmm .. but calling Digester.setLogger probably doesn't override the > > object known to the LogFactory... > > > > What exactly is the purpose of being able to set

Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-20 Thread robert burrell donkin
On Sunday, October 5, 2003, at 10:53 PM, Simon Kitching wrote: On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 00:43, robert burrell donkin wrote: 7. Logs at the moment, each plugin class uses it's own and the log cannot be set. i'm not in favour of this pattern for several reasons. most rules implementations use the dig

Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-20 Thread robert burrell donkin
On Sunday, October 5, 2003, at 10:53 PM, Simon Kitching wrote: Hmm .. but calling Digester.setLogger probably doesn't override the object known to the LogFactory... What exactly is the purpose of being able to set the Log object used by a class or instance? so the instance used to log by digeste

Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-05 Thread Simon Kitching
> > > > i'm also a bit confused why PluginDeclarationRule throws > > ClassNotFoundException's when require attributes are missing from the xml. > > this seems a wrong to me. (i've left these for the moment since it's > > easier for people to examine the code when it's in cvs.) there are also a

Re: [digester] plugins module ready for evaluation

2003-10-01 Thread Simon Kitching
On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 17:59, Simon Kitching wrote: > Hi, > > Many many moons ago, I proposed a "plugins" extension for digester. > > It is now ready for the world [yes, yes, brave words I know :-] Follow-up comments: * The package overview is accessable via this direct link: http://issues.apac