You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org> on 2003/03/19 15:01:38 UTC
Re: cvs commit: avalon-excalibur/fortress/src/java/org/apache/avalon/fortress/impl/handler
ComponentFactory.java
Stephen McConnell wrote:
> Re: the following change to the Fortress ComponentFactory.java:
>
> + final String message = "WARNING: " +
> m_componentClass.getName() +
> + " implements the Composable lifecycle stage. This is " +
> + " a deprecated feature that will be removed in the
> future. " +
> + " Please upgrade to using Serviceable.";
> + getLogger().warn( message );
> + System.out.println( message );
>
> Is this level of noise necessary. Firstly, I think the System.out is
> uneccessary and has the potential to become annoying for anyone with
> large numbers of Composable components.
+1. Printing messages to system.out is annoying in general; its why we
have logging :D
> Secondly, the log message at
> the level of "warn" seems to me to be excessive. I would consider a
> debug level log as much more appropriate.
don't think so; debug is disabled in most production systems. Would it
make you happy if "that will be removed in the future" were to be snipped?
We really do want our users to move away from Composable. How we should
tell them is a bit of a matter of preference. Some annoyance is good :D
cheers,
- Leo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: cvs commit: avalon-excalibur/fortress/src/java/org/apache/avalon/fortress/impl/handler
ComponentFactory.java
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Leo Simons wrote, On 19/03/2003 15.01:
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>> Re: the following change to the Fortress ComponentFactory.java:
>>
>> + final String message = "WARNING: " +
>> m_componentClass.getName() +
>> + " implements the Composable lifecycle stage. This is
>> " +
>> + " a deprecated feature that will be removed in the
>> future. " +
>> + " Please upgrade to using Serviceable.";
>> + getLogger().warn( message );
>> + System.out.println( message );
>>
>> Is this level of noise necessary. Firstly, I think the System.out is
>> uneccessary and has the potential to become annoying for anyone with
>> large numbers of Composable components.
>
>
> +1. Printing messages to system.out is annoying in general; its why we
> have logging :D
And it totally defeats our purpose of soft-deprecating Component stuff.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: cvs commit: avalon-excalibur/fortress/src/java/org/apache/avalon/fortress/impl/handler
ComponentFactory.java
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Leo Simons wrote:
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>> Re: the following change to the Fortress ComponentFactory.java:
>>
>> + final String message = "WARNING: " +
>> m_componentClass.getName() +
>> + " implements the Composable lifecycle stage. This
>> is " +
>> + " a deprecated feature that will be removed in the
>> future. " +
>> + " Please upgrade to using Serviceable.";
>> + getLogger().warn( message );
>> + System.out.println( message );
>>
>> Is this level of noise necessary. Firstly, I think the System.out is
>> uneccessary and has the potential to become annoying for anyone with
>> large numbers of Composable components.
>
>
> +1. Printing messages to system.out is annoying in general; its why we
> have logging :D
>
>> Secondly, the log message at the level of "warn" seems to me to be
>> excessive. I would consider a debug level log as much more appropriate.
>
>
> don't think so; debug is disabled in most production systems. Would it
> make you happy if "that will be removed in the future" were to be
> snipped?
Not really!
Look - we moved to a soft deprecation of Component and family because of
the agrivation that the deprecation messages generated. The changes
above move that aggrivation to a system administrators - which is way
worse because they don't care and should not care if its Servicable or
Composable - they want Workable and Reliable. They will set warn
enabled as a indicator of a potential problem - however, this change
will result in lots of repetative statements about a subject that is
irrelivant to the user.
>
> We really do want our users to move away from Composable. How we
> should tell them is a bit of a matter of preference. Some annoyance is
> good :D
Create an ant audit task. It goes over the *developers* code and spits
out *one* and only one message to the *developer* stating that the
codebase contains n occurances of classes referencing the deprecated
component package and a URL to a page containing migration notes.
Cheers, Steve.
>
> cheers,
>
> - Leo
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
>
>
>
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org
http://www.osm.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: cvs commit: avalon-excalibur/fortress/src/java/org/apache/avalon/fortress/impl/handler
ComponentFactory.java
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Leo Simons wrote:
>
> +1. Printing messages to system.out is annoying in general; its why we
> have logging :D
It also *slows* a system down tremendously.
> We really do want our users to move away from Composable. How we should
> tell them is a bit of a matter of preference. Some annoyance is good :D
The bottom line is that as long as we are supporting Avalon 4.x we can't
get away from it. We have to support it. Nevertheless, we can provide
instructions to our users that they really should use something else.
Keep in mind the whole conversation we had with Cocoon and deprecation.
We need to keep the spirit of that resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org