On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY <[email protected]> wrote:
> I just created and fixed MNG-5395 and MNG-5396, which are logger names > enhancements from the actual values that will give value even with slf4j- > simple > > These should be a starting point for more global discussion about our > logging > conventions then fixed in our global codebase, since IMHO, these issues > show > how we didn't use the logger names until now then we have a lot of place > where > our logging pratice is not good > > Of course, I'm interested in colorized output, but since it has impact on > logging implementation choice, which will require a strong discussion, this > can't be done for the moment :| > A strong discussion ? seriously ? We have 3 choices from my point of view : * We do nothing, we keep the slf4j-simple * We choose logback which is mature and used by a lot of people. Nowadays from my point of view it is the reference implementation * We choose log4j2 which is really promising but always in beta. But we may do this "political" to support this project which is rising from the ashes ( http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/index.html) In any case doing a choice nowadays for 3.1.0 won't prevent us to change it in the future. I really hope that the ability to switch from a logger implementation to another won't require several days of developments or I really missed something about it. Cheers Arnaud > > Regards, > > Hervé > > Le samedi 1 décembre 2012 09:17:52 Arnaud Héritier a écrit : > > Hi Jason, > > > > Couldn't we have a look at olamy's log4j2 branch to see if we could > > sanitize / merge it to propose at least one change for the end user > > and demonstrate the interest of the change about logs : a colorized > > console. > > > > I remember you did that in mvnsh/teslashell a long time ago (as an > > extension ?) and perhaps it could be easy to add properly this feature > > in 3.1.0 (otherwise it won't be before a 3.2.0). > > > > Myself I'm using a 3.1.0 fork with this patch and I' m really > > satisfied (it's so good to quickly see highlighted warning and errors > > ). I merged it back in the last 3.1.0 tag you did without issue > > > > Wdyt? > > > > --------- > > Arnaud > > > > Le 1 déc. 2012 à 00:20, Jason van Zyl <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > I'm done with the issues that cropped up so I'm ready to re-spin 3.1.0. > > > > > > Anyone want to add anything or discuss anything before I spin this? I'm > > > not in any rush so if folks want to talk about logging we can. But > given > > > the fact once SLF4J initializes it can't change the implementation > > > plugins integrating with Maven need to use the implementation we > choose. > > > This is how everything else in the world that integrates SLF4J has to > > > operate so I don't really see us being any different. > > > > > > I'll wait until tomorrow to re-spin. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Jason van Zyl > > > Founder & CTO, Sonatype > > > Founder, Apache Maven > > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- ----- Arnaud Héritier http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com Twitter/Skype : aheritier
