Hi Gary, apologize, I meant the native java.util.logging.* APIs.
all the best, -Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 10, 2012, at 5:39, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 10/02/2012 00:20, Simone Tripodi wrote: >>> I have a preference fo juli. >> I can work with that. > > Is a dependency on JULI better than on common-logging? > > Or is there some confusion talking about JUL vs JULI? > > Gary >> >>> IIRC, Tomcat has a bridge from juli to logging impl, >> It is actually the other way around. Tomcat uses a package renamed >> commons-logging hard-coded to output to juli by default. It provides a >> package renamed full commons-logging impl as well for users that want to >> use something else (usually log4j). >> >>> it would help to keep [pool] dependencies-less. >> That is a very big advantage of juli. >> >> Mark >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
