You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Eung-ju Park <co...@apache.org> on 2001/11/15 02:05:07 UTC
How about LogEnabled LogKitManager.
LogKitManager manage LogKit Logger and other LogKit components.
But I think It self is will be LogEnabled instead of Loggable.
LogEnabled LogKitManager is in my harddisk.
Test successful with phoenix version 1.1 logs.
Commit it? Is it correct direction?
----
* Eung-ju Park <co...@apache.org>, <co...@isoft.co.kr>
Life without music would be a mistake. --Nietzsche
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: How about LogEnabled LogKitManager.
Posted by Peter Donald <do...@apache.org>.
On Thu, 15 Nov 2001 12:05, Eung-ju Park wrote:
> LogKitManager manage LogKit Logger and other LogKit components.
> But I think It self is will be LogEnabled instead of Loggable.
As long as it is *also* Loggable (for backwards compatability).
Loggable.setLogger() can just call enableLogging() wrapping lokits Logger
with Frameworks LogKitLogger class.
> LogEnabled LogKitManager is in my harddisk.
> Test successful with phoenix version 1.1 logs.
> Commit it? Is it correct direction?
If do above I would say go for it.
--
Cheers,
Pete
-------------------------------------------------------------
| Egoism is the drug that soothes the pain of stupidity. |
-------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>