Anything is possible but I honestly don't want to do it because I don't really think it's worth it. Just use SLF4J properly, that's your path. I don't think this is really that onerous and deprives developers of their liberty :-) So many systems use SLF4J and I don't think many of them allow magic implementation selection. I don't think we're any different.
On Nov 30, 2012, at 1:07 PM, Mark Derricutt <m...@talios.com> wrote: > Would it be possible to implement something (nasty and rather iki under the > covers) along the lines of using say a > MavenLoggerFactory.getLogger(Foo.class, ImplementationClass.class, String > config). > > If this variation is used to get a Logger, use ClassWorlds or something to > create a new classloader -excluding- the system SLF4J setup, and using the > caller is requesting. > > Is something like that possible at all? > > > Jason van Zyl wrote: >> I don't believe it's valid to just let everyone do whatever they want. The >> only problem we've seen thus far is a problem where it's clearly a misuse of >> the SLF4J API. I still argue that the implementation used by the core can be >> used by plugins and letting arbitrary implementations and arbitrary >> manipulation of the logging system isn't really that valuable in compared to >> having a a consistent pattern that's used by so many others. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > Thanks, Jason ---------------------------------------------------------- Jason van Zyl Founder & CTO, Sonatype Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl --------------------------------------------------------- In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society
