<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Ideally. We will have to deal with commons-logging because projects
have adopted it.<br>
<br>
David M. Lloyd wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid1163002277.4659.26.camel@localhost" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 03:13 -0800, Scott M Stark wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I did the opposite and ported a number of the log4j appenders and
configuration to jdk logging so that you essentially had the same
configuration as the current log4j.xml and is in the common project:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://svn.jboss.org/repos/common/common-logging-jdk/trunk/src/main/java/org/jboss/logging/jdk/">https://svn.jboss.org/repos/common/common-logging-jdk/trunk/src/main/java/org/jboss/logging/jdk/</a>
We talked about where to go with logging some here:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3904365">http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3904365</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Cool, that's even better. Does that mean an end to using
commons-logging as well as log4j? Thinking from the perspective of an
application developer, not requiring an external logging package means
one less dependency to have to deal with. Better to use the API that's
already there.
- DML
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>