Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
JLouis
2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> any other opinion?
>
> do we move to JULI directly?
>
> - Romain
>
>
> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>
> > no:
> >
> > private void wblLog(Level level, String messageKey)
> > {
> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
> > {
> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
> > Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(), messageKey);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to keep a factory to allow
> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf does.
> >
> > - Romain
> >
> >
> >
> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an Exception, right? The
> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper handler we always have a
> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
> >>
> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul anyway...
> >>
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> >> > Cc:
> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
> >> > Subject: new logger api?
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
> >> >
> >> > any thought about it?
> >> >
> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL. The
> proposed
> >> > patch uses a system property but it can be something else.
> >> >
> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace() in the
> JUL
> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
> >> >
> >> > - Romain
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
