You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomcat.apache.org by "Kevin A. Burton" <bu...@relativity.yi.org> on 2000/01/19 04:00:29 UTC
log4g... IBM O.S license vs Apache license.
It looks like a lot of people want to integrate log4j into Jakarta.
What are the thoughts on the fact that the licenses aren't the same. I
agree from a technical standpoint but it is not perfect IMO to have a
product with two different licenses.
If we have to we can live with it I guess.
Kevin
--
Kevin A Burton
Senior Software Engineer
Kendara Inc
http://www.kendara.com
Mobile: 408-910-6145
Linux - The revolution will NOT be televised
Re: log4g... IBM O.S license vs Apache license.
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
"Kevin A. Burton" wrote:
>
> It looks like a lot of people want to integrate log4j into Jakarta.
>
> What are the thoughts on the fact that the licenses aren't the same. I
> agree from a technical standpoint but it is not perfect IMO to have a
> product with two different licenses.
>
> If we have to we can live with it I guess.
I believe the two licenses are compatible. Log4J is distributed under
the IBM Public Source License 1.0, so, I see no problems in that.
But I must admit it would be better to have them both under the same.
Maybe we can get an idea from some IBM officials... Mike?
Pier
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
- P I E R -
stable structure erected over water to allow the docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
- ApacheCON Y2K: Come to the official Apache developers conference -
-------------------- <http://www.apachecon.com> --------------------
Re: log4g... IBM O.S license vs Apache license.
Posted by Eduardo Pelegri-Llopart <Ed...@eng.sun.com>.
FYI: there is an accepted JSR (047) for the creation of a logging API
for the java platform. For more details, check:
http://java.sun.com/aboutJava/communityprocess/jsr/jsr_047_log.html
The facility is targetted to J2SE. I just noticed that the CAFE ended
Jan 14th, but if anybody in this list is interested I'd file a CAFE form
and send it anyhow to the JCP office right away; there may be some
wiggle room.
- eduard/o
PS. There is a mailing list for announcements like "new JSR", or "CAFE
open". Check at /java.sun.com/jcp
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> jon * wrote:
> >
> > on 1/18/00 7:00 PM, Kevin A. Burton <bu...@relativity.yi.org> wrote:
> >
> > > What are the thoughts on the fact that the licenses aren't the same. I
> > > agree from a technical standpoint but it is not perfect IMO to have a
> > > product with two different licenses.
> >
> > I don't agree with that at all. If there is a product with a GPL and a BSD
> > license, yes, ok, I see a fundamental issue. But it seems that the IBM
> > Public license is pretty compatible with the BSD license.
> >
> > In reality, the real issue here is not licenses, it is whether or not we can
> > count on IBM to commit the potential changes and bug fixes that we make to
> > it (ie: community oriented stuff). If that does not happen, then it would be
> > unwise of us to use the log4j stuff. The best idea really would be to make a
> > plugable log system like we do with Turbine's OPaL and the database
> > connection pool stuff. That way, we can just write code to the interface and
> > on the back end, plug whatever logging package we want into it.
>
> This (and many others things) is a design pattern established in the
> Avalon project. Since a server application is composed by blocks, each
> block may have a different version. In a legal sense, it could even be
> GPL.
>
> Say Tomcat needs logging, then asks for a "logger" that implements the
> "Logger" interface. Avalon knows that this particular setup implements
> Logger with a glue class that connects to log4j.
>
> If you want to change the logger implementation due to legal issues or
> technological details, you simply configure avalon to give a different
> Logger implementation. This is the power of OO polymorphism and it's
> exactly what Jon is suggesting.
>
> In fact, and this is the very reason why Avalon was created, each
> project has a logging subsystem, but if you "connect" it strongly to the
> server, your bound for life.
>
> Avalon gives you the component model and the framework to handle this.
>
> And, I'm happy to announce that JAMES 1.0 with full SMTP + POP3
> capabilities and based on the Avalon framework will be released very
> soon.
>
> I hope the key dev people around here take a look at what we've done.
>
> --
> Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
> able to give birth to a dancing star.
> <st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation Conference!
> ------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: log4g... IBM O.S license vs Apache license.
Posted by Sasa Brcerevic <sa...@tpg.au.com>.
very exciting, very exciting!!!
Sasa Brcerevic
--------------------------------
Technology Partners Group
Office: (02) 4925 1535
Mobile : 0416 297 442
mail : sasha@tpg.au.com
web : www.tpg.au.com
-----Original Message-----
From: root@universe.kendara.com [mailto:root@universe.kendara.com]On
Behalf Of Kevin A. Burton
Sent: Thursday, 20 January 2000 8:44
To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: Re: log4g... IBM O.S license vs Apache license.
jon * wrote:
>
> on 1/19/00 3:30 AM, Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Say Tomcat needs logging, then asks for a "logger" that implements the
> > "Logger" interface. Avalon knows that this particular setup implements
> > Logger with a glue class that connects to log4j.
> >
> > If you want to change the logger implementation due to legal issues or
> > technological details, you simply configure avalon to give a different
> > Logger implementation. This is the power of OO polymorphism and it's
> > exactly what Jon is suggesting.
> >
> > In fact, and this is the very reason why Avalon was created, each
> > project has a logging subsystem, but if you "connect" it strongly to the
> > server, your bound for life.
> >
> > Avalon gives you the component model and the framework to handle this.
>
> +1
>
> Turbine also has something fairly similar, but probably not as
well defined,
> called "Services". Everything is implemented as singleton so that you can
> simply ask for the "logging" service and you get a reference to
that object.
> Very cool way of extending things.
>
> -jon
+1. Writing an Adapter/Interface for this is perfect (except for the
extra CPU involved but this is trivial). This way in the future we can
replace xml4j if it becomes bad. We should think about doing this under
Avalon. Of course the release timings will have to be synchronized so
that it isn't a requirement of Tomcat to run with beta Avalon code.
Also I strongly believe in Avalon but we just need to get it going.
--
Kevin A Burton
Senior Software Engineer
Kendara Inc
http://www.kendara.com
Mobile: 408-910-6145
Linux - The revolution will NOT be televised
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: log4g... IBM O.S license vs Apache license.
Posted by "Kevin A. Burton" <bu...@relativity.yi.org>.
jon * wrote:
>
> on 1/19/00 3:30 AM, Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Say Tomcat needs logging, then asks for a "logger" that implements the
> > "Logger" interface. Avalon knows that this particular setup implements
> > Logger with a glue class that connects to log4j.
> >
> > If you want to change the logger implementation due to legal issues or
> > technological details, you simply configure avalon to give a different
> > Logger implementation. This is the power of OO polymorphism and it's
> > exactly what Jon is suggesting.
> >
> > In fact, and this is the very reason why Avalon was created, each
> > project has a logging subsystem, but if you "connect" it strongly to the
> > server, your bound for life.
> >
> > Avalon gives you the component model and the framework to handle this.
>
> +1
>
> Turbine also has something fairly similar, but probably not as well defined,
> called "Services". Everything is implemented as singleton so that you can
> simply ask for the "logging" service and you get a reference to that object.
> Very cool way of extending things.
>
> -jon
+1. Writing an Adapter/Interface for this is perfect (except for the
extra CPU involved but this is trivial). This way in the future we can
replace xml4j if it becomes bad. We should think about doing this under
Avalon. Of course the release timings will have to be synchronized so
that it isn't a requirement of Tomcat to run with beta Avalon code.
Also I strongly believe in Avalon but we just need to get it going.
--
Kevin A Burton
Senior Software Engineer
Kendara Inc
http://www.kendara.com
Mobile: 408-910-6145
Linux - The revolution will NOT be televised
Re: log4g... IBM O.S license vs Apache license.
Posted by jon * <jo...@clearink.com>.
on 1/19/00 3:30 AM, Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> Say Tomcat needs logging, then asks for a "logger" that implements the
> "Logger" interface. Avalon knows that this particular setup implements
> Logger with a glue class that connects to log4j.
>
> If you want to change the logger implementation due to legal issues or
> technological details, you simply configure avalon to give a different
> Logger implementation. This is the power of OO polymorphism and it's
> exactly what Jon is suggesting.
>
> In fact, and this is the very reason why Avalon was created, each
> project has a logging subsystem, but if you "connect" it strongly to the
> server, your bound for life.
>
> Avalon gives you the component model and the framework to handle this.
+1
Turbine also has something fairly similar, but probably not as well defined,
called "Services". Everything is implemented as singleton so that you can
simply ask for the "logging" service and you get a reference to that object.
Very cool way of extending things.
-jon
--
Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation
Conference! <http://ApacheCon.Com/>
Re: log4g... IBM O.S license vs Apache license.
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
jon * wrote:
>
> on 1/18/00 7:00 PM, Kevin A. Burton <bu...@relativity.yi.org> wrote:
>
> > What are the thoughts on the fact that the licenses aren't the same. I
> > agree from a technical standpoint but it is not perfect IMO to have a
> > product with two different licenses.
>
> I don't agree with that at all. If there is a product with a GPL and a BSD
> license, yes, ok, I see a fundamental issue. But it seems that the IBM
> Public license is pretty compatible with the BSD license.
>
> In reality, the real issue here is not licenses, it is whether or not we can
> count on IBM to commit the potential changes and bug fixes that we make to
> it (ie: community oriented stuff). If that does not happen, then it would be
> unwise of us to use the log4j stuff. The best idea really would be to make a
> plugable log system like we do with Turbine's OPaL and the database
> connection pool stuff. That way, we can just write code to the interface and
> on the back end, plug whatever logging package we want into it.
This (and many others things) is a design pattern established in the
Avalon project. Since a server application is composed by blocks, each
block may have a different version. In a legal sense, it could even be
GPL.
Say Tomcat needs logging, then asks for a "logger" that implements the
"Logger" interface. Avalon knows that this particular setup implements
Logger with a glue class that connects to log4j.
If you want to change the logger implementation due to legal issues or
technological details, you simply configure avalon to give a different
Logger implementation. This is the power of OO polymorphism and it's
exactly what Jon is suggesting.
In fact, and this is the very reason why Avalon was created, each
project has a logging subsystem, but if you "connect" it strongly to the
server, your bound for life.
Avalon gives you the component model and the framework to handle this.
And, I'm happy to announce that JAMES 1.0 with full SMTP + POP3
capabilities and based on the Avalon framework will be released very
soon.
I hope the key dev people around here take a look at what we've done.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation Conference!
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------
Re: log4g... IBM O.S license vs Apache license.
Posted by jon * <jo...@clearink.com>.
on 1/18/00 7:00 PM, Kevin A. Burton <bu...@relativity.yi.org> wrote:
> What are the thoughts on the fact that the licenses aren't the same. I
> agree from a technical standpoint but it is not perfect IMO to have a
> product with two different licenses.
I don't agree with that at all. If there is a product with a GPL and a BSD
license, yes, ok, I see a fundamental issue. But it seems that the IBM
Public license is pretty compatible with the BSD license.
In reality, the real issue here is not licenses, it is whether or not we can
count on IBM to commit the potential changes and bug fixes that we make to
it (ie: community oriented stuff). If that does not happen, then it would be
unwise of us to use the log4j stuff. The best idea really would be to make a
plugable log system like we do with Turbine's OPaL and the database
connection pool stuff. That way, we can just write code to the interface and
on the back end, plug whatever logging package we want into it.
-jon
--
Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation
Conference! <http://ApacheCon.Com/>