patch looks fine! LieGrue, strub
----- Original Message ----- > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > Cc: > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 11:03 AM > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > Hi, > > hope will be fine since we discussed of it together ;) > > > the only interrogation point is about webbeansloggerfacade which could be > split with a messageutil class but for me that's mainly fine :) > > - Romain > > > 2012/7/16 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > >> Hi! >> >> Thanks folks! >> Will review it this afternoon. >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeano...@gmail.com> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >> > Cc: >> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:59 AM >> > Subject: Re: new logger api? >> > >> > Hi devs, >> > >> > As discussed, just submitted the patch file to change the Logger API > over >> > the project. >> > It now contains a factory with a default implementation based on JUL. >> > >> > If someone can review it, that'd be great cause a lot of file > changed so >> > the sooner, the better to merge/integrate. >> > >> > Hope it help, >> > Jean-Louis >> > >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> mainly what was done in the patch of >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 (maybe a bit too > much >> but >> >> was >> >> done ;)) >> >> >> >> - Romain >> >> >> >> >> >> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeano...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> > I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE]. >> >> > Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we > could just >> >> review >> >> > the factory. >> >> > >> >> > Thoughts? >> >> > >> >> > JLouis >> >> > >> >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >> >> > >> >> > > I think questions are: >> >> > > 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL >> >> > > 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging > API? (add >> > or >> >> > reuse >> >> > > if we go for slf4j for instance) >> >> > > >> >> > > - Romain >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> >> >> > > >> >> > > > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain > :D >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to > remove >> > the >> >> > > > WebBeansLogger or not. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > LieGrue, >> >> > > > strub >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > <jeano...@gmail.com> >> >> > > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >> >> > > > > Cc: >> >> > > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM >> >> > > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Mark, >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > That be a good starting point for me to > submit a patch >> > if you >> >> agree. >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Jean-Louis >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau >> > <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> Or friends ;) >> >> > > > >> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis >> > MONTEIRO" >> >> > > > > <jeano...@gmail.com> a écrit >> >> > > > >> : >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> > You still have nights ;-) >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > Was a joke, sorry. >> >> > > > >> > JLouis >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg >> > <strub...@yahoo.de> >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > > gimme a few days plz, > currently holding >> > workshops the next 2 >> >> > > > > days. >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > LieGrue, >> >> > > > >> > > strub >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > > > >> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >> > <jeano...@gmail.com> >> >> > > > >> > > > To: > dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >> >> > > > >> > > > Cc: >> >> > > > >> > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, > 2012 8:15 AM >> >> > > > >> > > > Subject: Re: new logger > api? >> >> > > > >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > 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 >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >
