this sounds like yet another complexity.
I18n can be solved by a custom app layer even easier, no?
So this would mean we should go your custom myfaces logger wrapper. I would not
complain if commons depend on it, I think.
Mario
-----Original Message-----
From: simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Saturday, Dez 15, 2007 8:00 pm
Subject: Re: [commons] What Logger ?
To: Reply- "MyFaces Development" <dev@myfaces.apache.org>To: MyFaces
Development <dev@myfaces.apache.org>
The issue is that Trinidad (ADF faces) has always emitted
>internationalised log messages, by using its own logging implementation.
>
>But commons-logging does not offer any help for that. If code wants to emit a
>log message that can be internationalised, it looks like this:
>
> if (log.isDebugEnabled()) {
> String msg = TrinidadMsgFormatter.format("SomeMsgKey", arg1, arg2);
> log.debug(msg);
> }
>
>This is certainly inconvenient.
>
>The slf4j equivalent looks like this:
> log.debug("SomeMsgKey", arg1, arg2);
>which at initial glance seems nicer.
>
>However there are a number of gotchas. The most important is how the resources
>are found to map (key, args) to a sensible message.
>
>If the underlying logging implementation is i18n-aware then SLF4j jus tpasses
>the data on. But the underlying impl still needs to somehow know how to find
>the Trinidad resource bundles in order to create sensible logging messages. I
>don't have any experience with i18n-aware logging systems, so I'll leave that
>to others to comment on how easy/difficult it is to arrange that.
>
>But AFAIK if the underlying logging implementation is *not* i18n-aware, then
>the message written to the log will simply be "SomeMsgKey", with all info
>about the actual params lost. This, for example, is the default SLF4J
>behaviour when configured to forward messages to commons-logging or log4j.
>
>Regards,
>
>Simon
>
>On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 18:32 +0000, Bruno Aranda wrote:
> And sorry, I do not know sl4j, what do we gain with it? Thanks!
>
> Bruno
>
> On 15 Dec 2007 19:26:00 +0100, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > could you explain what we gain from that switch?
> >
> > I just see one additional jar as the user has to deal with cl anyway.
> >
> > It is the defacto standard.
> >
> > Did you consider the java std log facility. Might be as good as sl4j.
> > A cl adapter might be doable there too.
> >
> >
> >
> > Mario
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: "Matthias Wessendorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Saturday, Dez 15, 2007 7:12 pm
> > Subject: Re: [commons] What Logger ?
> > To: "MyFaces Development" <dev@myfaces.apache.org>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > I think, that Manfredo will also put it into myfaces-core
> > >:-)
> > >
> > >Simon suggested to create a MyFaces Logger,
> > >but... commons should not depend on that.
> > >
> > >(a cool discussion on the hackaton)
> > >
> > >-M
> > >
> > >On 15 Dec 2007 19:01:00 +0100, Mario Ivankovit
