Re: [jboss-dev] Abstract classes?

On 06/04/2009 11:30 AM, Adrian Brock wrote: I think you'll find that you are incorrect, if you're referring to this thread: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-development/2007-December/011166.html I argued the following: 1) All popular logging APIs should be supported 2) Everyone should switch to JUL 3) App developers should be able to use whatever API they like without blowing things up or getting other unexpected results. I still stick by my #1 and #3, though I conceded #2 a rather long time ago (there are a lot of features present in other logging APIs that are missing in the j.u.l.Logger API, and my current opinion based on user feedback is that slf4j is least likely to introduce dependencies that aren't already present in a given project). As I recall, your response was: 1) Everyone should use jboss logger 2) We will always have to deal with many logging frameworks 3) JUL is broken and can never be used safely, period I still disagree with #1, but that's one of those things that nobody will ever really agree on. I agree totally with #2, and in fact that ties directly with my #1 and #3. I have since refuted your #3 by producing a JDK logmanager (with javadocs btw) that isn't broken, which allows us in 5.1.x to trap JUL messages and forward them into our log without risking performance/deadlock/memory leak/etc issues. I have since come to the conclusion that there are two separate arguments: what logging APIs to support, and what logging backend to use. The answer to the first is "all of them", and the answer to the second is "it doesn't matter, so long as it works". Thus it doesn't matter what logging APIs each project chooses to use because all the major APIs should be supported. So when working on the new logging POJO service, I've stuck to that philosophy. Since that time the vast majority of my posts on the topic of logging have gone unanswered. Do you have anything to add? If so, how about posting constructive criticism here: http://www.jboss.org/community/wiki/LoggingPOJOServiceRequirements So my question for you in this thread is, are we still in disagreement about something that is relevant here? - DML