Re: logging through log4j (or better yet, SLF4J)

[Henrib]

Erik Hatcher wrote:
> 
> JUL is the substrate that we (Java developers) should be logging to.
> Practically speaking, I'd like the world to look like this:
>    App -> JUL -> Log4J adapter
> 
Agreed.

Erik Hatcher wrote:
> 
> the rant is on the containers not doing the  
> right thing by incorporating (something like) JULI.
> 
Containers {w,sh}ould not have to invent specific and proprietary if JDK
logging specified a way to define LogManager per class-loader; imho, the
rant is squarely on Sun.

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/logging-through-log4j-tp13747253p16987046.html
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.