[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-583?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15076010#comment-15076010
]
A. Soroka commented on JENA-583:
--------------------------------
It does seem to me that {{<optional>}} should work here. It keeps the
dependency in play for the project in hand (Jena) but breaks the transitive
dependency for projects downstream. So instead of downstream projects needing
to exclude {{log4j}}, they would have to explicitly include it. I think most
downstream projects are using Jena as a suite of libraries, not as a source of
CLI tools to include in themselves, so this should be fine, right?
> Get rid of log4j dependency in jena-core
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: JENA-583
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-583
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Jena
> Affects Versions: Jena 2.11.0
> Reporter: Francis De Brabandere
> Labels: logging
>
> Apache jena core seems to pull in log4j and slf4j-log4j12, since you use
> slf4j I would suppose I can plug in my own logging backend. If you have a
> hard dependency on log4j at least make it optional and don't force it in the
> core jena components.
> Ultimately this avoids these kinds of issues:
> SLF4J: Class path contains multiple SLF4J bindings.
> SLF4J: Found binding in
> [jar:file:.../target/universal/stage/lib/ch.qos.logback.logback-classic-1.0.13.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
> SLF4J: Found binding in
> [jar:file:.../target/universal/stage/lib/org.slf4j.slf4j-log4j12-1.6.4.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
> SLF4J: See http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#multiple_bindings for an
> explanation.
> SLF4J: Actual binding is of type
> [ch.qos.logback.classic.util.ContextSelectorStaticBinder]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
