james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Webb" ...@inovem.com>
Subject RE: Avalon dependance in mailets
Date Tue, 07 Jan 2003 16:34:28 GMT
I think we should stick with what we've got (log4j). They should in
theory be pluggable, but this is Avalon's problem, not James.

-- Jason


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kenny Smith [mailto:kenny@journalscape.com] 
> Sent: 07 January 2003 16:12
> To: James Developers List
> Cc: nicolaken@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Avalon dependance in mailets
> 
> 
> Hi Jason,
> 
> I don't know enough technically about about java.util.logging 
> and log4j 
> to really give a blow by blow of which is better. I've used 
> both, they 
> both worked fine, both seemed easy to use. I think I like 
> log4j better, 
> but that's not really a good enough reason for choosing one over the 
> other. I would probably lean towards log4j simply because 
> it's another 
> apache product. Any support we can give is good support. :)
> 
> Kenny
> 
> Jason Webb wrote:
> > Logging is an interesting one.
> > As far as mailet developers are concerned I think logging should be 
> > provided (by the container?).  Everyone needs to log 
> something at some 
> > time, but DB access is not always required. My only real 
> problem with 
> > the current system is it's lack of fine control over the 
> logging. If 
> > James 3.0 will go to JDK 1.4 we could use the builtin 
> logging there. 
> > I'm not going to get into a logging system war here either :)
> > 
> > 
> > -- Jason
> > 
> > 
> > 
<snip'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