[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLUTO-553?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12701346#action_12701346
 ] 

John Bollinger commented on PLUTO-553:
--------------------------------------

Also, I don't follow what makes a portlet container different from any other 
servlet container in this regard.  For instance, why isn't your issue a problem 
for Tomcat?

> commons-logging unsuited for cross-context webapplication invocation usage - 
> migrating to slf4j
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PLUTO-553
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLUTO-553
>             Project: Pluto
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: general, portlet container
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.0
>            Reporter: Ate Douma
>            Assignee: Ate Douma
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>
> The benefits and downsides of using Apache Commons Logging already has been 
> discussed endlessly on the web, but last Thursday I've encountered a really 
> nasty problem which imo finally nails it as unsuited for usage with portals.
> The problem is commons-logging using the ContextClassLoader to determine the 
> current LogFactory and logger.
> As a Portal/PortletContainer (e.g. pluto-container) depend on cross-context 
> invocation, determining the LogFactory for a portal/portletcontainer class 
> while being cross-context invoked from a portlet application,
> this means commons-logging will use the invoking portlet application its 
> classloader instead of the expected/needed classloader of the 
> portal/portletcontainer...
> Now, this could be "fixed" by either wrapping each and every cross-context 
> callback into the portal/portletcontainer and temporarily setting the current 
> ContextClassLoader or wrapping commons-logging itself,
> but imo the LogFactory "resolving" solution applied by commons-logging is 
> fundamentally problematic for *our* purpose.
> I won't go as far as saying commons-logging is bad and should never be used, 
> but for portals/portletcontainers and cross-context application handling it 
> just doesn't fit.
> Now, where does that leave us?
> Looking at alternatives, I think there are only a few:
> a) only using Java(4) logging
> b) using Apache Log4J directly
> c) switch to slf4j (http://www.slf4j.org)
> Of the above options, a and b forces end users (integrators) of Pluto to 
> leverage the same logging solution which imo is too restricted:
> - Java logging is too limited and a nuisance to use (personal opinion)
> - Log4J is great but not everyone enjoys it, and for instance Logback (LGPL) 
> is building up a lot of users because of its (supposedly) higher performance 
> and lesser overhead
> AFAIK, that leaves only slf4j which, although not ASF based, has a compatible 
> license and is being adopted already a lot by other ASF projects.
> The benefit of slf4j is also (besides "fixing" the commons-loggings problems) 
> that it supports gradual "migration" from commons-logging through its 
> jcl-over-slf4j solution.
> During this weekend, I've spend some time doing a local migration of both 
> Pluto 2.0 and Jetspeed-2.2 to slf4j to see how much trouble that would be and 
> if I would encounter unexpected problems.
> I can now attest that this migration is mostly "painless", slf4j even has a 
> migrator tool which does most of the hard work (code wise).
> Of course, there was some "pain" in the maven dependencies migration but I 
> could complete that in a reasonably short time (manually) as well.
> After all this, the JSR-286 TCK (of course) still completed successfully and 
> logging still works just as fine.  
> As I see no real alternative for solving this imo *blocking* issue, I think 
> finalizing this migration to sfl4j is the only reasonable resolution.
> I'll also send a message to the Pluto dev list soliciting further feedback on 
> this, but if nobody objects I intend to commit my changes for this soon (I 
> will create a separate issue for migrating Jetspeed-2.2 to slf4j). 

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to