On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:32:41 +0100 Emmanuel Lecharny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Trustin, > > I think that everybody should keep calm and peaceful. What are we > discussing about ? A logging framework and nothing else. > > As you said, you have added a page explaining how to use SLF4J with > MINA and another project. It works, it is simple, and you have added > the full howto. So what is the problem? Does someone will trade off > against MINA just because he has 'problem' with slf4j when we _know_ > that slf4j is not a problem at all? come on ... Adding 2 jars in a > classpath is a good price to pay for benefit from MINA. > Hi Emmanuel, I think everybody understood your point. I think everybody agree here for say slf4j is really not a problem. The idea is to give some solution for the people who can't live with another dependency that will look 'ugly' in their classpath (I know you think it's stupid :D). So that why releasing a patchset for them, or a mina.jar bundled with slf4j-nop will be fine and will hurt nobody. Or perhaps a very fine wrapper if Trustin come with something really light, and non intrusive. Julien
