On Dec 18, 2007 4:47 AM, Julien Vermillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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). > Can't live with another dependency that will look 'ugly'? Come on! You know anyone can live with that but they might not like it. This is not our problem. Alex
