On Mon, 13 May 2002, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 23:09:14 +0200
> From: Ceki Gülcü <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Resi
At 12:17 10.05.2002 -0700, Craig McClanahan wrote:
>For Tomcat 4 specifically (and generically for 2.3-based servlet
>containers), the webapp class loader is allowed to look locally first for
>things before delegating. Thus, the current implementation in LogFactory
>allows you to put commons-log
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> * If the app has no explicit configuration of commons-logging,
> there are two subalternatives:
>
> - If no other logging implementation has a services entry,
> the factory configured by Log4J will be used.
>
> - If there is also anoth
On Sat, 11 May 2002, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 00:24:43 +0200
> From: Ceki Gülcü <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Resi
On Sat, 11 May 2002, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 00:06:40 +0200
> From: Ceki Gülcü <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Resi
At 12:17 10.05.2002 -0700, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> > Another, much more serious worry that I have is the fact that the
> LogFactory
> > class keeps track of LogFactories by classloader. What will happen in an
> > environment with multiple classloader per application, eg. EAR classloader
>
At 14:47 10.05.2002 -0500, Richard Sitze wrote:
>If the interface is based on the commons logging factory then the logger
>(Log4J presumably) is already set by the time Log4J is encountered (else it
>would go elsewhere).
>
>If not, the current default is going to go to Log4J anyway... How SHOULD
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
om> cc:
Subject: Re: Resisting the temptation
nless you guys don't want to use it 'cause it's not jakarta stuff (which is a PUN, of
course - if you don't get it, ask me)...
ADK
-Original Message-
From: Rob Oxspring [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Fri, May 10, 2002 6:47 PM
To: Jakarta Commons Develope
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 20:43:45 +0200
> From: Ceki Gülcü <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Resi
At 13:17 10.05.2002 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>The real problem is the digester dependency on logging, isn't it?
It's one of the problems, perhaps the most interesting one but not
the only one. Other problems are the increase in the number of
necessary jar files, JDK compatibility issues
On 5/10/02 10:49 AM, "Richard Sitze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ceki,
>
> You don't need complete dependence on commons-logging. About a month back
> there was a discussion on separating the interface from the implementation
> (separate packages and probably separate jar files), and really ma
On 5/10/02 9:17 AM, "James Strachan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Ceki
>
> Anyone who uses the digester needs digester, beanutils, collections and
> logging. Its a shame there's not just a single jar for all these 4 (very
> common) things. How about we bundle these 4 things into a single 'ube
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> The down side is that jakarta would have two actively supported digesters,
> the one in commons and the one in log4j resulting in significant maintenance
> effort being wasted.
I wouldn't say XmlMapper is 'actively' supported - the code is frozen, it
does
Just a though from left field, but why not change log4j to be an interface
and use a factory to generate the trace instances. While my company had
standardized on the use of log4j, we had cases where it was not desireable
to distribute the log4j.jar file.
To get around the problem we created a
Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: Resisting the temptation
- Original Message -
From: "Ceki Gülcü" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 4:07 PM
Subject: RE: Resisting the tempta
not invented here
(check this out: http://www.atomica.com/ - used to be gurunet, i think)
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Oxspring [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 10:47 AM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: Resisting
- Original Message -
From: "Ceki Gülcü" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 4:07 PM
Subject: RE: Resisting the temptation
> I'll be the first to admit that my reaction is a var
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> [snip] Maybe there would
> be a way for log4j to override commons-logging's search mechanism and force
> c-l to use log4j as the underlying implementation. C-l changed quite a bit
> since I
> last looked at it. Before continuing with more talk, I'll now
On Fri, 10 May 2002, James Strachan wrote:
> Anyone who uses the digester needs digester, beanutils, collections and
> logging. Its a shame there's not just a single jar for all these 4 (very
> common) things. How about we bundle these 4 things into a single 'uber-jar'?
> Say, commons-core.jar.
Hi Ceki
Anyone who uses the digester needs digester, beanutils, collections and
logging. Its a shame there's not just a single jar for all these 4 (very
common) things. How about we bundle these 4 things into a single 'uber-jar'?
Say, commons-core.jar. We could maybe ensure that whenever we relea
21 matches
Mail list logo
