> Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>>I guess we should remove Log4J dependencies from public Cayenne API
>>> and at least eliminate Log4J bundling and keep commons logging under
>>> the hood. Of course with deprecation and all that...
>
> It really seems to be mostly search & replace - I can start with that,
> but the "public API" bit is turning out to be a problem. Mostly any
> classes that allow access to the logging level (log4j.Level) also expose
> it in one way or another and commons-loging has (rightly so) no
> replacement. Not sure what to do about these cases (like QueryLogger,
> RuntimeLoadDelegate)
> but I can start with the easy ones if nobody objects.
>
> -h
Well, I'd actually like to understand what you have in mind first. I agree
with you that commons-logging is not a (good) solution. So we need to
design one.
Maybe our own "commons logging" interface that has its own levels that can
be referenced throughout Cayenne API. And then include a default Log4J
implementation mapping these levels to Log4J?
Andrus
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri May 13 2005 - 09:01:23 EDT