RE: Interesting thread about commons-digester and other component s

[Mark Womack <mw...@bevocal.com>]

I have not had a chance to read in complete detail, but some initial
thoughts:

1) I do think that having a "special" version of the digester is going to be
a long-term headache.
2) I did like the suggestion (in concept) of having the commons-logging
log4j related bits live in the log4j jar.  I don't know if I have followed
all the implications of this, but I like the idea at the moment.
3) I also liked the idea that the commons-logging interfaces could be broken
out from the implementations.
4) As much as I like all the stuff that happens in commons, there are TOO
many jars and dependencies to keep track of, IMO.  Telling new users of
log4j all the jars that they would require to run it is going to become more
complicated.
5) All that said, I'm not sure any of it really solves the dependency
problem(s).  Plus, most of log4j's configuration messages are routed through
LogLog, not log4j itself.  Is there a way to make the digester (and related
classes) use a LogLog version of the commons-logging interface when being
used by log4j and do the normal stuff otherwise?

just some thoughts,
-Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ceki Gülcü [mailto:ceki@qos.ch]
> Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 2:13 AM
> To: log4j-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Interesting thread about commons-digester and other 
> components
> 
> 
> 
> The thread can be found here:
> 
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=102103609500002&r=1&w=2
> 
> 
> --
> Ceki
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>