RE: Log4j as "Source-Code Level" or "Compiled (black-box) Compone nt" Reuse?

[John Volkar <jv...@etransport.com>]

Sorry folks, I should have been more clear, please don't everyone respond to
this as a true "poll", I'm just looking to get a feel for how Ceki or other
outstanding developers of the framework percieve it use.

Regards
John Volkar

-----Original Message-----
From: John Volkar 
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 7:56 AM
To: 'LOG4J Users Mailing List'
Subject: Log4j as "Source-Code Level" or "Compiled (black-box)
Component" Reuse?


Branched from "RE: DOMConfigurator.configureAndWatch w/multiple async
appenders"

Ceki/All,
How do you see most people making use of the log4j package?  I mean, I want
to treat it as a 3rd party black-box that I just make use of as-is.  While I
can of course make changes to the framework and recompile it (to achieve
effects like .resetConfiguration() begin called via the PropertyWatchdog)
this seems to go against the block-box type of reuse that I (in my head)
seem to desire?

So, I'm curious, of the two styles of reuse, what are folks doing?

"Source-Code Level" - Just include the source code in your project, and make
tweaks as desired (and do more work to upgrade to new versions as needed.)

-or-

"Compiled (black-box) Component" - Use the compiled framework as a lib for
your project, and limit customization to the framework provided extension
points (and drop-in replacement upgrade whenever desired, and only do some
work when the framework breaks backwards compatibility.)

Poll results:
"Source-Code Level"................ 0
"Compiled (black-box) Component"... 1

Regards

John Volkar


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@jakarta.apache.org