[jboss-dev-forums] [Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: java.util.logging Bridge Component
scott.stark@jboss.org
do-not-reply at jboss.com
Thu Dec 4 01:44:56 EST 2008
Maybe there will be one less logging api in the future:
"log4j-dev at logging.apache.org" wrote :
| On Dec 3, 2008, at 5:41 AM, Ceki Gulcu wrote:
|
| > Hello,
| >
| > As you are probably aware, more and more projects are adopting the
| > SLF4J API. I would venture say that SLF4J's adoption rate is roughly
| > equivalent to that of log4j itself. Although the SLF4J API is not
| > perfect, most SLF4J users seem to be extremely happy with it.
| >
| > Harry Metske synthesized various logging paths in JSPWiki
| >
| > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394188/jspwiki-log.odp
| >
| > I was taken aback by the picture he paints. I think we as log4j
| > committers owe it to Java developers to propose a saner logging model.
| >
| > Given the multiplicity of logging APIs in the Java world, I propose
| > that log4j implement the SLF4J API directly. This can be done in the
| > next version of log4j, say 1.3 or 2.0.
| >
| > Unfortunately, the adoption of the SLF4J API by log4j will be break
| > 100% compatibility with existing log4j clients. More precisely,
| > logging statements passing java.lang.Object as the message parameter
| > will need to be changed to java.lang.String. Assuming that the
| > proportion of logging statements using objects instead string is
| > extremely small, comparatively few users will be affected. More
| > importantly, in my experience, even very large projects can be
| > migrated to the SLF4J API within half an hour.
| >
| > There is even a tool called slf4j-migrator to help with such
| > migration [1].
| >
| > Is there support for my proposal?
| >
| > [1] http://www.slf4j.org/migrator.html
|
| > -- Ceki Gülcü
| >
|
| I've logged this issue as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-27 and Scott's desire for increased support for properties as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-28. I've attached a PDF version of the referenced OpenOffice file to LOG4J2-27.
|
| If the proposal is that direct support for SLF4J be considered as a potential feature of log4j 2.0 as previously described on this list (a designed for Java 5 replacement for log4j 1.x with fine grained concurrency), then LOG4J2-27 captures that potential feature for consideration at the proper time.
|
| If the proposal is to create a branch of the log4j 1.2 code base that directly implements SLF4J, that is a different matter. I could recount all sorts of previous discussions on the issues involved, but I don't want to do that if that is not the proposal.
|
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4194213#4194213
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4194213
More information about the jboss-dev-forums
mailing list