[jboss-dev-forums] [Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: java.util.logging Bridge Component

[scott.stark@jboss.org]

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