On 9/10/07, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bernd Fondermann schrieb:
> > What I am asking is: What framework should be the default?
> >
> I think I would use commons-logging...
>
> bye
> Norman
I'd like to describe the different levels of indirection which are
present in James/Spring to do logging:
A. Component Level
Avalon Components receive a
org.apache.avalon.framework.logger.Logger
implementation, which delegates logs to B.
B. Adaptor Level
bridge receiving component logs, delegating logs to C.
C. Concrete Logger
Currently the only implementation present is writing to System.out
If we'd add commons-logging here, and nothing else, we'd just add
another level of indirection,
changing the architecture above to
A. same as above
B. same as above
C. Commons-Logging Adaptor Level
bridge from module-specific bridge to whatever concrete API is
discovered and chosen by commons-logging
Disadvantage: The user is left with the choice of a concrete logging
API and its proper configuration.
We could either add another level of indirection:
D. Default Concrete Logger
configured to be discovered by commons-logging and do the final logging.
Or remove commons-logging from the picture at level C. and have
C. Use concrete Logging API (not commons-logging)
logs according to its configuration
While commons-logging seems a good choice at first sight, after
thinking about it for a while, I now think we should go for the second
option.
I personally favor log4j, but I don't have a strong opinion about that.
Bernd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
