Hi Maximilien,

camel-freemaker's pom.xml seems to be the only one which was missed while
the commons-logging => slf4j migration went live by camel 2.7.x, see [1] for
the details. Nevertheless the code of this component does effectively
logging through slf4j-API (see the code at [2]), so that you should be able
to force this component to log to your prefered logging API, i.e.
JDK-Logging. By all other components is dependency to log4j is of the scope
"test" which doesn't effect camel users like you & me in any way.

On the other hand what I DO NOT understand in most of the poms is the
dependency declared to be like this:

    <dependency>
      <groupId>org.slf4j</groupId>
      <artifactId>slf4j-log4j12</artifactId>
      <scope>test</scope>
    </dependency>
    <dependency>
      <groupId>log4j</groupId>
      <artifactId>log4j</artifactId>
      <scope>test</scope>
    </dependency>


which to my understanding is obsolete, as slf4j-log4j12 has already a
dependency to log4j, namely to the RIGHT version it requires. So I would say
one should remove ALL those DIRECT dependencies to log4j in all poms. The
overhead by this today is that if someday camel upgrades to slf4j-log4j12
version x+1 the log4j should also be upgraded, namely to the version
matching exactly to slf4j-log4j12 version x+1.

Currently camel depends on:

slf4j ===> 1.6.1
slf4j-log4j12 ===> same as slf4j, which makes sense
log4j ===> 1.2.16

And when one looks at [3] he sees that the log4j dependency would already be
given for FREE with the RIGHT version matching to slf4j-log4j12.

But maybe I'm missing something...

Regards, Babak  

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-2229
[2]
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/trunk/components/camel-freemarker/src/main/java/org/apache/camel/component/freemarker/
[3]
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/slf4j/slf4j-log4j12/1.6.1/slf4j-log4j12-1.6.1.pom

--
View this message in context: 
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Camel-freemarker-tp4693216p4693550.html
Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to