btw, jason mentioned that lots of apache frameworks already use SLF4J. And he prominently mentioned CXF.
Now here comes the bitter truth: THEY DROPPED IT AGAIN! They now use a java.util.logging.Logger facade to redirect to log4j, slf4j or whatever http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cxf/trunk/api/src/main/java/org/apache/cxf/common/logging/AbstractDelegatingLogger.java And now folks please go over and read all the reasons for this move... Just a small pointer: Why are the following projects and others NOT using slf4j? * MyFaces * Tomcat * Geronimo * Tomee * OpenJPA * OpenWebBeans * CXF * younameit because it doesn't work for containers in all situations. 4 Month of trying to get it working. And still there are a lot cases which are known to create problems. Doesn't that ring a bell? I'm perfectly fine to do the same as CXF and use jul as facade and back it with SLF4J or log4j. But there are only 2 ways technically to not introduce classpath issues: jul or our very own mojo-logger facade (which is in place since 2004). ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dan Tran <dant...@gmail.com> > To: Maven Developers List <dev@maven.apache.org> > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 8:55 PM > Subject: Re: Logback in Maven Core > > +1 on for logback. > > However, is it possible to switch to Log4j2 by manually repackage > maven distribution? > > Thanks > > -D > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Anders Hammar <and...@hammar.net> wrote: >> I'm +1 for logback as the slf4j impl. >> >> /Anders >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 3:32 AM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> > wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I looked around a bit more today and I don't think SLF4J Simple is > viable >>> long term, I don't want to patch it anymore as I would have to do a > day's >>> work to make changes that keep the performance levels up, get it > reviewed >>> and released, and I honestly don't think it's worth it anymore. > I would >>> rather spend my time building out the plugin test cases and help to > finish >>> the classloader blocking of SLF4J. I don't mind spending time > getting it >>> all working but I don't want to waste my time on an implementation > we're >>> going to toss. >>> >>> After a conversation with the PMC it will require a vote to accept > Logback >>> which is EPL but I wanted to ask committers and interested users about >>> using Logback. I believe Logback is the best choice as it's the > most mature >>> and battle tested implementation because once it goes in it's > likely not >>> ever to come out. Many of us are users and have integration experience > with >>> Logback and it's what I use everyday for logging in all my other > projects >>> and I've been a happy user for years. I see Logback as best of > breed and >>> widely adopted including 8 projects at Apache. >>> >>> There's no point in asking the PMC to vote on the acceptance of > Logback if >>> it's not acceptable by the community. If there are interested users > I would >>> really like to hear what you think because you're the ones who will > have to >>> live with the choice that is made. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Jason >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------- >>> Jason van Zyl >>> Founder & CTO, Sonatype >>> Founder, Apache Maven >>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> To do two things at once is to do neither. >>> >>> -- Publilius Syrus, Roman slave, first century B.C. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
