Re: [JXTA discuss] RE: [JXTA user] JXTA logging framework

Chris Audley wrote:
> I've often wished that the libraries I use (JXTA included) didn't try to
> impose on me their logging framework choice.  As I use
> java.util.logging, this change will benefit me.  However, instead of
> solving the problem, it just shifts the burden from java.util.logging
> users to log4j users who will in the future be forced to use multiple
> logging frameworks.  

Agreed that it's kind of no win to make a choice or to change logging 
frameworks.

> Have you considered using Jakarta commons logging or a similar
> implementation (your own if you insist) that supports pluggable logging
> frameworks?

We had considered it but in the end rejected commons logging as an 
option for a couple of reasons;

- commons logging provides only a very low lowest common denominator for 
either of log4j or java.util logging

- rather than being an abstraction it amounts to a third alternative 
logging API

- there have been some concerns with the stability, maturity and support 
of commons logging itself made us a bit uneasy.

Given that it didn't seem to offer us any particular advantage we chose 
to go with java.util.logging.

Mike


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike [bondolo] Duigou [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 3:46 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [JXTA user] JXTA logging framework
> 
> As there have been no objections to this move we have begun planning to
> make the transition from Log4J to java.util.logging. The current plan is
> to convert the platform, cms and shell projects immediately following
> the upcoming 2.3.8 code freeze (May 22nd).
> 
> The conversion will be implemented following the code freeze so as not
> to impact other changes which will be pushing hard to complete before
> the code freeze.
> 
> We ask that all committers refrain from committing changes to platform,
> cms and shell projects on May 23rd until the (massive) update is
> committed.
> 
> Mike
> 
> Mohamed Abdelaziz wrote:
>> Community members,
>>
>> We are considering a change to the logging framework for the upcoming 
>> release (June 2006) of the JXTA JSE platform and supporting projects 
>> (shell, CMS). This would replace Log4J with java.util.logging, and 
>> would remove one of the required jars and ease the deployment of the 
>> platform in embedded applications.  This change should have no impact 
>> on other project which rely on Log4J.  The planned changes would also 
>> include a logging object allowing for runtime and static logging 
>> configuration (including the ability to omit logging through 
>> compilation)
>>
>> We would like to solicit your input as to whether this change would 
>> have any negative impact upon your application or development process.
> 
>> We are also interested in hearing suggestions and comments to improve 
>> JXTA logging and/or lessen the impact of this change.
>>
>>
>> The JXTA Team
>>
>> The change would be along the following lines :
>>
>> import org.apache.log4j.Level;
>> import org.apache.log4j.Logger;
>> ..
>> ..
>> if (LOG.isEnabledFor(Level.INFO)) {
>>      LOG.info("Now connected to JXTA network"); }
>>
>>
>> Becomes  :
>>
>>
>> import java.util.logging.Level;
>> import java.util.logging.Logger;
>> import net.jxta.Logging;
>> ..
>> ..
>> if (Logging.INFO && LOG.isLoggable(Level.INFO||)){
>>      LOG.info("Now connected to JXTA network"); }
>>
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional
> commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> 
>