This issue is becoming a real headache even a bottle of tylenol can't fix, along with the reentrant logging issue: http://xrl.us/bctaa
I think these two issues should be considered together to resolve the issues related with logging. Let me summarize current situation: 1) There are people (A) who don't want to use SLF4J but java.util.logging. 2) There are people (B) who like to use SLF4J and they say SLF4J supports java.util.logging along with log4j. 3) People A say java.util.logging can also do the same by employing a proper LogManager implementation. 4) There is a logger reentrance problem in MINA, which means it is difficult to write a MINA-based appender for the most logging frameworks that doesn't allow reentrance. This problem can be worked around by turning off logging in MINA, but this is not reasonable. Without considering the item #4, it might look like a debate about choosing the default logging framework for MINA 2. However, taking the item #4 into picture, it leads me to think we need a thin built-in layer for logging that is dedicated to MINA. Moreover, such a layer could satisfy both party (people A and B). Also, we could make the SLF4J dependency optional by making java.util.logging the default logger. This will potentially reduce the barrier of configuring SLF4J which is frequently asked. Of course, this doesn't mean that users have to use that logging layer to log their application messages but it means only the classes under org.apache.mina should use that layer for all logging. Does my idea make sense? Or do you have any better idea? We are all obssessed in logging right? :D Cheers, Trustin -- what we call human nature is actually human habit -- http://gleamynode.net/ -- PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
