Logging

["Marc M. Adkins" <Ma...@Doorways.org>]

Is there going to be any APR logging functionality?  It seems a reasonable
addition, and I'm somewhat surprised to not see it yet.  Especially since
Apache itself obviously does some amount of logging.

It's been suggested to me that log4j would be a good set of functionality
for this purpose.  I took a look and it has a lot of the features that I've
come to desire myself (and re-implemented over the years in various
languages).

Unfortunately the log4c port (of log4j) seems less than optimal.  I would
think that it could be done somewhat better, retaining more of the original
log4j functionality, despite the lack of objects in C.

If it's just a matter of finding someone with time and interest I might be
willing to have a go at it.  Or is there a reason why this isn't supposed to
be a part of the APR?

Marc M. Adkins

RE: Logging

[Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>]

> > > Is there going to be any APR logging functionality?
> > > Or is there a reason why this isn't supposed to be a part of the
APR?
> >
> > My personal opinion:
> >
> > APR is a *portability* library.  If it's functionality not aimed at
> making
> > applications more portable (or a helper for such functionality, as
with
> > pools and hash tables and similar low-level data structures), then
it
> > doesn't belong in APR.  We made a conscious effort to avoid having
APR
> > become the kitchen sink (though it seems APR-util has become the
kitchen
> > sink instead :-/ ).  Anyway, AIUI, that's the reason logging
remained in
> > Apache and didn't go into APR.
> 
> I can respect that argument.  I had already noticed that the code I
was
> writing was different from the APR code body in the sense that it
_used_
> APR
> but didn't have any platform-specific sections of its own.  I can
always
> develop what I want on top of APR (e.g. Log4APR) as a separate
project.
> 
> However...having a nice base like APR I would like to develop tools on
top
> of it that might have general utility, if not be specifically targeted
at
> portability.  The idea being that if I'm using APR for development I
would
> like features X and Y and Z also, and I want them to work _with_ APR
and
> _using_ APR so that my hassles and code size are both minimized.
> 
> Just as there exists CPAN for Perl packages (and so on and so forth),
> might
> there also (eventually) be a similar repository for APR packages?

I hope so, and there will be if enough people find APR useful.

Ryan

RE: Logging

[Cliff Woolley <jw...@virginia.edu>]

On Sat, 2 Mar 2002, Marc M. Adkins wrote:

> I can respect that argument.  I had already noticed that the code I was
> writing was different from the APR code body in the sense that it _used_ APR
> but didn't have any platform-specific sections of its own.  I can always
> develop what I want on top of APR (e.g. Log4APR) as a separate project.

++1.. sounds great!

> However...having a nice base like APR I would like to develop tools on
> top of it that might have general utility, if not be specifically
> targeted at portability.  The idea being that if I'm using APR for
> development I would like features X and Y and Z also, and I want them to
> work _with_ APR and _using_ APR so that my hassles and code size are
> both minimized. Just as there exists CPAN for Perl packages (and so on
> and so forth), might there also (eventually) be a similar repository for
> APR packages?

That could be a respectable eventual goal.  For now, I think we just need
to keep track of which things have been written for APR and attempt to
maintain cross-publicity as much as possible.  If the body of APR-ized
works becomes as massive as that of the list of Perl modules (wow), then
something more centralized perhaps.  :)

--Cliff

--------------------------------------------------------------
   Cliff Woolley
   cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
   Charlottesville, VA

RE: Logging

["Marc M. Adkins" <Ma...@Doorways.org>]

> > Is there going to be any APR logging functionality?
> > Or is there a reason why this isn't supposed to be a part of the APR?
>
> My personal opinion:
>
> APR is a *portability* library.  If it's functionality not aimed at making
> applications more portable (or a helper for such functionality, as with
> pools and hash tables and similar low-level data structures), then it
> doesn't belong in APR.  We made a conscious effort to avoid having APR
> become the kitchen sink (though it seems APR-util has become the kitchen
> sink instead :-/ ).  Anyway, AIUI, that's the reason logging remained in
> Apache and didn't go into APR.

I can respect that argument.  I had already noticed that the code I was
writing was different from the APR code body in the sense that it _used_ APR
but didn't have any platform-specific sections of its own.  I can always
develop what I want on top of APR (e.g. Log4APR) as a separate project.

However...having a nice base like APR I would like to develop tools on top
of it that might have general utility, if not be specifically targeted at
portability.  The idea being that if I'm using APR for development I would
like features X and Y and Z also, and I want them to work _with_ APR and
_using_ APR so that my hassles and code size are both minimized.

Just as there exists CPAN for Perl packages (and so on and so forth), might
there also (eventually) be a similar repository for APR packages?

Marc M. Adkins

RE: Logging

[Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>]

> On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Marc M. Adkins wrote:
> 
> > Is there going to be any APR logging functionality?  It seems a
> reasonable
> > addition, and I'm somewhat surprised to not see it yet.  Especially
> since
> > Apache itself obviously does some amount of logging.
> >
> > If it's just a matter of finding someone with time and interest I
might
> be
> > willing to have a go at it.  Or is there a reason why this isn't
> supposed to
> > be a part of the APR?
> 
> My personal opinion:
> 
> APR is a *portability* library.  If it's functionality not aimed at
making
> applications more portable (or a helper for such functionality, as
with
> pools and hash tables and similar low-level data structures), then it
> doesn't belong in APR.  We made a conscious effort to avoid having APR
> become the kitchen sink (though it seems APR-util has become the
kitchen
> sink instead :-/ ).  Anyway, AIUI, that's the reason logging remained
in
> Apache and didn't go into APR.

I agree completely.  There is no reason to put logging into APR, it
isn't a portability problem.  It is simply a problem that many apps need
to solve.

If logging is an important problem to solve, and people want to do it,
then a separate project should be create (separate from APR IMO), to
create a logging API that uses APR.

Ryan

Re: Logging

[Cliff Woolley <jw...@virginia.edu>]

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Marc M. Adkins wrote:

> Is there going to be any APR logging functionality?  It seems a reasonable
> addition, and I'm somewhat surprised to not see it yet.  Especially since
> Apache itself obviously does some amount of logging.
>
> If it's just a matter of finding someone with time and interest I might be
> willing to have a go at it.  Or is there a reason why this isn't supposed to
> be a part of the APR?

My personal opinion:

APR is a *portability* library.  If it's functionality not aimed at making
applications more portable (or a helper for such functionality, as with
pools and hash tables and similar low-level data structures), then it
doesn't belong in APR.  We made a conscious effort to avoid having APR
become the kitchen sink (though it seems APR-util has become the kitchen
sink instead :-/ ).  Anyway, AIUI, that's the reason logging remained in
Apache and didn't go into APR.

--Cliff


--------------------------------------------------------------
   Cliff Woolley
   cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
   Charlottesville, VA