Re: LoggerStore

Peter Donald wrote:
> On Tue, 27 May 2003 06:24 pm, Peter Donald wrote:
> 
>>Two things remain to do before we do a release;
>>
>>* Determine what we are going to do with "type". Do we make a separate
>>LoggerStoreFactory for each type (XML vs properties).

done - I've refactored to remove type and split the Log4J factory.

>>* Determine if we are keeping Configurator and if we are unit test. I would
>>prefer to rely directly on InitialLoggerStoreFactory as I think that is
>>simple enough but if you want to keep it in we can keep it in.

done - I've refactored the test cases to have an abstract base class,
and concrete ones for LoggerStore, LoggerStoreFactory and Configurator.
There is still a problem as it tries to look for the 
Log4jLoggerStoreFactory I've removed ... could you have a look?
I'm obviously missing something ...

>>Any other issues you can think of?
> 
> 
> documentation!

yep - will do.






-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: ObjectStore.
If flattening out C++ or Java code to make your application fit in a
relational database is painful, don't do it! Check out ObjectStore.
Now part of Progress Software. http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge