[izpack-devel] Starting a discussion about logging

[Eric Rose]

On Monday 28 August 2006 05:36, Marc Eppelmann wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Since it was several wished, that IzPack *always* logs its steps and files
> that are written, substituted and executed to a _user-defined_ or
> timestamp-based logfile, I re-invoke this discussion.

Good - that's one thing my collegues are complaining about in IzPack.

>
> - It is possible to integrate 3rdParty Loging Products such as log4j.
> -to break a butterfly on a wheel ;-)

Log4j has a lot of options - given that it's a fully-fledged logging package, 
it should. At it's base, though, it's really only the inclusion of a jar and 
a series of single method calls in the client code.

I should add a disclaimer :). We use it at work, and I have had to hack the 
ode a bit for our own uses, some time ago, so I am reasonably familiar with 
the package. Theere's on properties file that is used to drive it, which is 
certainly no more complicated than the configuration required to IzPack 
itself.

>
> - Or to use the new Java.Logging classes functionality, which are to new in
> my opinion.

I disagree.  Logging as part of the JDK has been around from Java 1.4, and 1.5 
is now in use. It has the advantage of being part of the JDK, obviating the 
need for any external dependency.

>
> - Or to implentend and integrate a self-implemented and lightweight
> solution maybe as derived a solution of the current Debug-Class.
>
> I would prefer a mixed solution: integrate borrowed / adapted code from
> Jog4J to meet what we need.- To hold this lightweight Installer as
> Lightweight Installer ;-)
>
> But I also would vote for an own independed solution if easy adaptable /
> expandable in future.


A custom solution may be more lightweight, and in-house code might be more 
conducive to flexibility in changing the solution, but carries with it the 
problem we have had at my workplace - you have to maintain a logging product 
of sorts. I'd rather break a butterfly on a wheel than reinvent the wheel, 
and have to roll it :)
 
Personally, I'd plump for java.util.logging as first choice, followed by 
log4j, and an in-house solution last.

Eric

-- 
Eric Rose              | "Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
eric at integeo.com       |         Juvenal (Satires, VI.347-8)

***********************************************************************
This message contains privileged and confidential information intended
only for the use of the addressee named above.  If you are not the
intended recipient of this message you must not disseminate, copy or
take any action in reliance on it.  If you have received this message
in error please notify the sender immediately.  Any views expressed in
this message are those of the individual sender, except where the
sender specifically states them to be the views of another (including
a Body Corporate).

If you wish to opt out from future messages, send an email to
unsubscribe at integeo.com with the subject UNSUBSCRIBE
************************************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/izpack-devel/attachments/20060828/3e5f7e9b/attachment.pgp