I see. Pretty nice.
Andrus
>> Ok, I am having trouble explaining myself (partially cause I planned
>> this feature after 1.2 so I haven't explored all the options yet). I
>> am not
>
> It could also be me having trouble understanding you - same stick,
> different end. :)
>
>> concerned if we use Jakarta commons-logging in the backend. However
>> the goal of this effort is to avoid any explicit dependencies in the
>> API (i.e. in the method signatures) on either commons-logging or
>> Log4J..
>
> OK now I understand. Well, I disagree but that's another problem. ;-) I
> just checked my 3-minutes-brainstorming Level abstraction into my
> sandbox, feel free to use it as inspiration. In its current form (more
> or less) it could function as replacement for the log4j Level references
> in e.g. QueryLogger.
>
> Holger
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri May 13 2005 - 13:23:51 EDT