SandBox Policy?

[Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>]

Should we have a requirement for Sandbox code that none of the
components/libraries should directly depend on LogKit?

The Assembly project has a direct dependency.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org

Re: SandBox Policy?

[Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>]

Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Should we have a requirement for Sandbox code that none of the
> components/libraries should directly depend on LogKit?

no. No policy on sandbox: its a sandbox! Policy for non-sandbox stuff is 
that it should not depend directly or indirectly on sandbox.

> The Assembly project has a direct dependency.

which makes sense in the context of a sandbox: assembly has some stuff 
not ready for inclusion on excalibur-logger :D

- LSD



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org

Re: SandBox Policy?

[Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>]

Stephen McConnell wrote:
> 
> p.s. While Assembly used logkit as part of its implementation but this 
> is not exposed to users of the API.

I just want to make sure that all future development efforts are logging
toolkit agnostic.  We have a logging abstraction that we need to use.
If we develop one for LogKit, we need a mechanism for Log4J or JDK 1.4
logging.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org

Re: SandBox Policy?

[Paul Hammant <pa...@yahoo.com>]

> p.s. While Assembly used logkit as part of its implementation but this 
> is not exposed to users of the API.

I think it is fine for containers per se (or components of containers) to use whatever hidden log
impl they want.

- Paul

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org

Re: SandBox Policy?

[Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>]

Berin Loritsch wrote:

> Should we have a requirement for Sandbox code that none of the
> components/libraries should directly depend on LogKit?
>
> The Assembly project has a direct dependency.


Berin:

The Assembly package has a direct dependency on LogKit because I've 
experimenting with how meta data should interact with a logging 
manager.  The interfaces in the excalibur-logger package proved 
insufficient because it assumes that the entire application logging 
policy is applied at one hit via a configuration whereas in Assembly 
there is a separation between the establishment of the logging system 
and establishment of logging channels. 

In particular, information concerning require logging channels and 
associated parameters are not known until an appliance is loaded.  The 
approach I took was to put in place an "alternative" logging manager 
that would enable some freedom to experiment and determine the real 
requirements.  That process isn't finished (because there are other 
higher priority items being dealt with).  Once I get some time to look 
into this further I except to be able to come up with a clear set of 
requirements for changes and we look at how those changes could/should 
be incorporated to excalibur-logger.

Cheers, Steve.

p.s. While Assembly used logkit as part of its implementation but this 
is not exposed to users of the API.

SJM.

-- 

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