james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Danny Angus" <da...@apache.org>
Subject RE: [Mailet API] Logging Proposal
Date Mon, 10 Jun 2002 21:50:36 GMT
> The downside of (2) is that since logging, etc... are *always*
> needed, every
> implementor will put in his, and you can say goodbye to interoperability.

Ok, this is just Not True.

Interoperability will be provided by the API, logging won't affect this.

Any mailet application built according to the API and in spirit with it,
according to the specification document as well as the code, will be
interoperable with any container similarly built and any other application.

Logging is a "leaf" on the tree of dependance, I can see how other services,
such as repository or spool providers need to be controled in order to
ensure interoperability, being "nodes" on that tree.
The solution to providing logging is that the mailet application developer
distributes their preferred logging classes with their application, because
in that situation interoperability is not compromised, the central purpose
of the API is still served in spirit and in detail.
There must be zillions of servlet applications that provide 100% of the
logging service they require, and still comply with the API.

I'm actually coming to the conclusion that providing logging in the API
would make logging more cumbersome for sophisticated users, over engineered
for trivial uses and discourage many users from making their own
architectural decison on a matter which is of *no* relevance to us.

I'd like to know why anyone would expect sophistcated logging service to be
provided by the API, and what stories or use cases they can advance to
support this.

d.


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message