Hi all, I'm sorry for breaking in this deep discussion. Yes, I had to get in to all recent discussions but didn't have enough time these days. I hope I can participate to most conversation from today.
Here's my opinion on logging: I disagree with using JDK 1.4 logging API as other people mentioned. I also don't like monitor pattern from my experience in the Directory project which adopted the pattern long before and has abandoned it now. It usually takes serious amount of time only in designing monitors, not the real implementation. People start to hesitate to change the software's behavior or structure because refactoring will impact monitor interfaces seriously. IMHO, monitor pattern is a poor choice than JDK 1.4 logging API from the view point of rapid development and continuous refactoring. My suggestion is to use SLF4J. The Apache Directory project team is using SLF4J and we're very satisfied with it. It is very similar to commons-logging, but it doesn't have any class loader issues commons logging is suffering from. Moreover, Ceki's support was very responsive. Another option would be defining our own simplistic logger interface like MX4J team did. This is OK, but filtering log message in a fine-grained manner will make the logger interface as complex as other logging frameworks so the merit of the thin home-grown interface is gone. That's why MX4J's messages are not be able to be filtered by package or class; it uses only one log category. But this information might be outdated. Please let me know if I'm wrong. Trustin -- what we call human nature is actually human habit -- http://gleamynode.net/ -- PGP key fingerprints: * E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41 4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E * B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4 455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6
