| Corona logging vs log4j direct access [message #73847] |
Fri, 29 September 2006 15:12 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: claudemontpetit.gmail.com
Hi,
I just posted this to the wrong newsgroup. I confused corona logging with
the corona framework... So sorry for the cross-post.
I am a little confused about the necessity of using Corona-logging vs
using log4j directly. In our new OSGi-based project, we need to pick a
logging framework. We do not care about abstracting it behind an interface
that would allow us to swap it later on. We can stick to the library will
will choose to use. We are leaning toward log4j.
My confusion is related to usage of the log4j API in the code. We have
some common class libraries that are coded with zero dependancies on OSGi.
They are packaged in an OSGi bundles afterward. Thus, they cannot use (nor
depend on) the OSGi log service interfaces.
How does this fit with Corona-logging? Does the decision to use Corana
implies that all logging done by all bundles should know about the
interfaces to produce log?
I would like to allow the use of log4j directly without having to lookup
for the OSGi log service. I do not mind creating a dependancy on a log4j
OSGi bundle, but in the code, I still want to simply do this:
org.apache.log4j.Logger.getLogger("my.logger");
Is this possible? Will direct access to the log4j static instance somehow
hook into the corona bundle?
--
Claude
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03301 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
