The better thing to do would be to point you to http://logback.qos.ch or http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/. Compare the features in either of those against JUL.
When building a framework you can't look at logging in isolation. Nobody wants to configure JUL and Logback and Log4j, etc. Ralph On Feb 10, 2012, at 12:14 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote: > Hi Ralph, > > just for a matter of curiosity and filling my lacks of knowledge, can > you point me please to some doc about the lacks of j.u.l. ? > > Many thanks in advance, 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 9:07 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > wrote: >> >> On Feb 10, 2012, at 7:02 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: >> >>>> >>> >>> Yeah, that isn't going to work. I really do wish java.util.logging had >>> been designed with JavaEE in mind. Clearly it wasn't. We tried fixing >>> this in Tomcat but even with JULI the APIs just aren't available to do >>> this. You could do JVM specific hacks but they will break just as soon >>> as the JVM vendor changes their internal API (as they are perfectly >>> entitled to do). In the end, Tomcat categorized this problem as WONTFIX. >> >> Sorry, JUL wasn't designed with anything in mind as far as I can tell. It >> sucks as a facade and the implementation is barely adequate. I've delayed >> creating the bridge from JUL to Log4j 2 primarily because all the ways to do >> it are bad. >> >>> >>> With this in mind, commons-logging is a better choice as it should be >>> possible to have an entirely contained logging setup within the >>> application and a properly written container shouldn't interfere with >>> this. Commons-logging is also relatively simple to redirect to something >>> else. >> >> That is the primary reason to use Commons Logging, IMO. Unfortunately, the >> API is pretty minimal. >>> >>> Given the discussion so far has been around commons-logging or >>> java.util.logging, I think these two are the front runners. I can live >>> with either but I have a very narrow focus - i.e. what can i get working >>> easily with Tomcat's packaged renamed version of pool2. >> >> I'm not sure why you'd rule out SLF4J. Although it isn't perfect, as a >> facade it works pretty well. >> >>> >>> Taking a wider view, commons-logging is probably the better choice as >>> although it adds a dependency, it is easier for folks to integrate with >>> their logging framework of choice. >>> >> >> Yes, it is a much better choice than JUL just because of that. >> >> Ralph >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 >
