+1Technically from a pure ClassLoader point our very own makes more sense.We
can probably think about Lambda to resolve the String lazily.Insofar the SLF4J
api is outdated as well.
And of course internally we might still route to slf4j. But we should not
expose those classes to the plugins if not necessary. They just unnecessarily
create classpatch clashes some times (been there done that).
LieGrue,strub
On Saturday, 23 January 2021, 18:06:34 CET, Romain Manni-Bucau
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Benjamin,
Guess it was unexpectedly deprecated, let's revert that on master.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
Le sam. 23 janv. 2021 à 17:58, Benjamin Marwell <[email protected]> a
écrit :
> Robert, that's deprecated! What to use instead? Or was it deprecated in
> error?
>
>
> https://github.com/apache/maven/blob/master/maven-plugin-api/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugin/logging/Log.java
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 23 Jan 2021, 12:10 Robert Scholte, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > See
> >
> https://maven.apache.org/ref/3.6.3/maven-plugin-api/apidocs/org/apache/maven/plugin/AbstractMojo.html
> >
> > You can get the logger by calling getLog(), so don't inject the logger
> > here.
> >
> > Robert
> > On 22-1-2021 19:19:47, Slawomir Jaranowski <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > It is not only an extension case.
> >
> > For example I can write Mojo like:
> >
> > @Mojo(name = "example")
> > public class ExampleMojo extends AbstractMojo {
> >
> > @Inject
> > private MyService myService;
> >
> > @Override
> > public void execute() {
> > }
> > }
> >
> > and
> >
> > @Named
> > public class MyService {
> >
> > @Inject
> > private Logger??? logger;
> > }
> >
> > So the question is what logger we should use in the component?
> >
> > Another case is that components can be Singleton and their instance will
> be
> > created once.
> >
> >
> > pt., 22 sty 2021 o 12:36 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > napisał(a):
> >
> > > Do it means if we represent our classloading structure, all loaders on
> > top
> > > of mojo use slf4j and others our maven abstraction.
> > > Sounds ok to me except for extensions which are not in maven land so
> > > subject to slf4j api breaking changes and undefined/ambiguous context -
> > > which is never true for maven code itself since we guarantee and own
> it.
> > > Should we promote the abstraction for extensions too?
> > >
> > > Le ven. 22 janv. 2021 à 11:41, Robert Scholte a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > I'm not so sure about this, it probably depends on the context.
> > > >
> > > > I think we should assume that JSR330 component are not aware of their
> > > > context.
> > > > They should not require a Maven context, hence in such case it makes
> > > sense
> > > > to use SLF4J API, while the application selects the logger
> > > implementation.
> > > > Think of Maven Extensions. I'd say they should be using the SLF4J API
> > > > because their context is not bound to 1 plugin.
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > > Robert
> > > > On 18-1-2021 09:34:01, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > > > Generally you want to propagate the mojo logger to have consistent
> logs
> > > but
> > > > worse case we should promote mojo logging api as injectable at
> > injection
> > > > points if needed, avoids all the mess you can get in mojo with
> loggers
> > to
> > > > respect that rule of dumb IMHO.
> > > >
> > > > Le dim. 17 janv. 2021 à 22:48, Slawomir Jaranowski
> > > > a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > We can use the JSR-330 component for developing maven plugins -
> > > > > https://maven.apache.org/maven-jsr330.html
> > > > >
> > > > > There is not clear how to access logging api from JSR-330
> component.
> > > As I
> > > > > found out last time, maven plugins should not directly use
> slf4j-api,
> > > so
> > > > > what is recommended in this case.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Sławomir Jaranowski
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sławomir Jaranowski
> >
>
