logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gülcü <c...@qos.ch>
Subject Re: [POLL] Moving UGLI outside Apache?
Date Wed, 06 Apr 2005 16:41:41 GMT

log4j.jar would almost certainly include the code of the new project
in the same way it includes UGLI. As such, I'd also expect the new
project to replace UGLI.

As for JCL, there are very encouraging signs that commons-dev
participants are becoming more and more aware of the problems
associated with JCL. There is also considerable emotional baggage
carried by several participants. Starting from a clean slate should
improve the chances of participation by key players in the commons-dev
community. We would actively seek input from the commons-dev side such
that there will be no distinction between JCL 2.0 and the new
project. As you suggest, there is no guarantee that this approach will
achieve the desired result. However, I believe that it has better
chances of succeeding compared to top-down approaches we tried in the
past.


At 05:54 PM 4/6/2005, Jacob Kjome wrote:

>Will this allow us to continue to include UGLI in Log4j.jar or will it be
>required to be a separate jar?  Also, what are our plans for UGLI?  I haven't
>followed the commons-dev list.  Is there any new information being provided
>there as to JCL's plans?  Is UGLI part of it?  If we continue with UGLI 
>and JCL
>doesn't go with it, are we prepared to continue with UGLI or are we going to
>drop it for whatever JCL comes up with?  Is JCL dead-set on developing JCL 2.0
>instead of moving to an agnostic (external to Apache) logging API or is 
>there a
>possibility of discontinuing it?  Are we (Log4j and JCL) prepared to 
>promote two
>"competing" logging API's?
>
>Moving UGLI outside Apache might help it become more accepted, and it is a 
>good
>point that GPL and LGPL projects probably need to depend on a logging API with
>a  non-Apache license.  But there are also these issues with JCL that need to
>be worked out.  Do we have official answers for these questions?  If not, then
>the move is fine for UGLI but maybe not so fine (or maybe just irrelevant) for
>JCL.
>
>
>Jake

-- 
Ceki Gülcü

   The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/



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


Mime
View raw message