Done.
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
> Yeah, that sounds right.
>
> Eelco
>
> On 6/5/07, Al Maw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I'm pretty sure our slf4j dependencies are very wrong.
>>
>> I see the root pom.xml in trunk has a dependencies section that doesn't
>> actually include slf4j-api (it's only in the dependenciesManagement).
>>
>> Instead, it includes slf4j-log4j12 and log4j, which surely isn't right?
>> Isn't the whole point of using slf4j so that we don't mandate a logging
>> framework choice? If we're going to force log4j bindings we may as well
>> use log4j everywhere.
>>
>> I think we should be depending on sfl4j-api for the core projects and
>> that's it. The examples project or test scopes may well want bindings
>> for log4j.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Al
>>
>> --
>> Alastair Maw
>> Wicket-biased blog at http://herebebeasties.com
>>
>
> !DSPAM:46658514197911337720495!
>
