This one time, at band camp, Edward Sumerfield said:
ES> ----- Original Message -----
ES> From: Bruce Snyder
ES> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ES> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:40 PM
ES> Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Logging API (was: Timestamp/Key idea)
ES>
ES> [snip]
ES>
ES> ES>Taking on the commons logging API would delegate all these issues to the
implemented logger.
ES>
ES> Maybe I'd be better off just using Log4J in Castor. I know that most of
ES> the Open Source apps that I use make use of Log4J so I have no problem
ES> with that. But we really need the ability to enable/disable logging on
ES> a per package basis. Also, I really prefer Log4J's API. If I was to use
ES> Log4J the only changes I'd need to make is adding the custom prefix.
ES>Are you saying that you need to enable/disable logging on a per package basis
within the normal execution of the Castor API or just when you are testing and
debugging it? Your driver code should contain your Log4J API calls to set the filters
you want but the castor.jar log.writes should be limited to the commons calls.
I would like to offer both. It's mainly for debugging but if a user
wants to influence the logging level I want to offer that option.
ES>When I run my testing code to use castor I have problems getting good information
out of it because I am forced to use your logging API. I don't have a Log4J config
file. You are saying I should use one and keep it in sync with my jdk Logging config
file.
This is exactly why I am refactoring Castor's logging.
ES>I can't remember all the log4k methods but aren't they similar to the JDK methods?
Yes, Log4J provides debug, info, warn, error and fatal. They're very
similar.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","<0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]&5R\"F9E<G)E=\$\!F<FEI+F-O;0\`\`");'
-----------------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
unsubscribe castor-dev
