ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Russell Gold <russg...@acm.org>
Subject Re: Re: [Vote] Logging
Date Wed, 09 May 2001 03:22:41 GMT
At 1:06 PM +1000 5/9/01, Peter Donald wrote:
>And as I said - we don't need pluggability.

I would tend to agree. Pluggability in a logging service is a bit of over-engineering. But
given the intended timeframe of Ant 2, doesn't shooting for the JSR make the most sense? 
That ways, when JDK 1.4 comes out, Ant can use its logging API directly, rather than adding
its own.  This is also the best argument for log4j - to the extent that the standard logging
API will follow the path set by log4j, it will probably be the easiest bridge to the standard.

If it were not for these factors, I would tend to agree with you that logkit would be preferred
- a simpler API is generally to be favored over a more complex one, and the greater historical
stability could be a good sign as well. But with a standard looming ever closer on the horizon,
it would seem to be spitting in the wind to ignore it.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Russell Gold                     | "... society is tradition and order
russgold@acm.org                 | and reverence, not a series of cheap
                                 | bargains between selfish interests."
http://www.httpunit.org          |   - Poul Anderson, "Iron"

Mime
View raw message