On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Antonio Petrelli<[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/6/16 Greg Reddin <[email protected]> > >> What is the motivation for the change? I don't have strong opinions >> one way or the other. > > > The big problem with commons-logging is that, if you have it in > application-server-wide library, you need to put the real implementation of > the logger in the server. > This means also a single configuration. > > SLF4j uses a different approach: it uses an API and an implementation, bound > at compile time. This way you can compile correctly your code, but the > configuration can stay in your app without interfering with the rest of the > server. > > However, it seems that MyFaces folks are switching to java.util.logging. > Should we? Isn't it "too simple"?
I don't personally believe java.util.logging is used widely enough yet to justify tying people to that, especially when we have not done so thus far. > Antonio >
