+1 I want to volunteer to do it I have not done anything for BVal since its start.
As per the release of 0.4 I think this would be something we need to put it in there. Is there any rough estimate on when we need to cut the 0.4 release ? On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > yup, jul is shitty but better than having 3rd party deps. > > +1 > > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Matthias Wessendorf <mat...@apache.org> > > To: "dev@bval.apache.org" <dev@bval.apache.org> > > Cc: > > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 8:46 PM > > Subject: Re: Logging API > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Monday, March 19, 2012, Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> +1 > >> > >> regards, > >> gerhard > >> > >> > >> > >> 2012/3/19 Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> > >> > >>> Apparently the selection of slf4j might not suit everyone. While I am > >>> comfortable enough with its API (I prefer slf5j), it does cause us to > >>> impose downstream dependencies on our users that aren't really > >>> necessary. As an implementation of an EE specification it would be > >>> nice of us to impose dependencies, particularly ones that require a > >>> degree of manual intervention like slf4j, on our users only when > >>> absolutely necessary. We have 233 .java files in src/main folders, > >>> only 10 of which contain the String "slf4j" by which I guess > > that we > >>> are only logging a very small amount of information, in which case we > >>> might consider ourselves better citizens to simply use jul for BVal > >>> regardless of how we may feel about it in the context of implementing > >>> applications. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >>> > >>> Matt > >>> > >> > > > > -- > > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > > -- Thanks - Mohammad Nour ---- "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving" - Albert Einstein
