+1 Thanks for the links Hoss, I personally wouldn't prefer to use a framework for something built into Java itself. Infact, this discussion prompted me to think about why Tomcat is not using commons-logging if it is such a great thing.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > : I know logging is sometimes a religious debate, but would others > consider a > : patch that switched Solr to use log4j? Or, commons-logging? I just > don't > : think JUL is up to snuff when it comes to logging. It's a PITA to > configure, > : is not flexible, doesn't play nice with other logging systems and, all > in all, > : just seems like crappy design by committee where the lowest common > denominator > : won out. > > I'm opposed to this. and I'vealready said everything i think needs to > be said about the topic in this thread... > > > http://www.nabble.com/Changing-Logging-in-Solr-to-Apache-Commons-Logging-to9728394.html > > ...I won't rehash all my points again, except to reiterate that: > > 1) JDK logging is first and foremost an API, with a default > implementation. If people spent as much time writing implementations of > that API as they do writing other logging frameworks, or tweaking apps to > work with multiple frameworks, the world would be a much better place. > > 2) If we do switch from something as universal as JDK logging to a > differnet framework, then commons logging in particular is a really bad > choice. It is not ment to be a "logging framework" used by applications, > it exists to be an abstraction to protect small libraries from needing > to worry about the logging framework choices of hte applications that use > them. In the words of Rod Waldhoff... > > http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/2003/08/15.html > >> "In fact, there are very limited circumstances in which Commons Logging > >> is useful. If you're building a stand-alone application, don't use > >> commons-logging. If you're building an application server, don't use > >> commons-logging. If you're building a moderately large framework, don't > >> use commons-logging. If however, like the Jakarta Commons project, > >> you're building a tiny little component that you intend for other > >> developers to embed in their applications and frameworks, and you > >> believe that logging information might be useful to those clients, and > >> you can't be sure what logging framework they're going to want to use, > >> then commons-logging might be useful to you. > > > : Not too mention SolrJ uses commons-logging, so as it stands now Solr > : uses two different logging mechanisms. > > SolrJ using commons logging isn't something I was particularly aware of, > but it does in fact make sense given it's intended usage as library for > use in other papplications. That doesn't mean Solr is using two differnet > mechanisms, it means that Solr as an application is using the JDK Logging > API, and SolrJ as a library in use by Solr is using the commons-logging > API on top of that ... the underlying logging implementation is still up > to the end user running Solr in their servlet container. > > > -Hoss > > -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
