vlsi commented on PR #192: URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/192#issuecomment-1207773563
> My reluctance to adding new dependencies for things that could be add-ons +1 > I'd say the same thing about an SLF4J based logger implementation Well, at least slf4j allows plugging several implementations, so if slf4j is ever added, then users could add whatever logging impl they want via the relevant slf4j-.. bridge. That does not mean slf4j should be added to Ant, however, I mean that if log4j2 appender is added, then it incurs extra dependency and risk, while it is useful only for log4j2 users. It might be that in a couple of years, it would require adding ant-log4j3, and so on. > this is a low-maintenance contribution Well, I could easily imagine how users might want to make the logging level to be configurable. For instance, users might want to log private targets at a lower level than public ones, so the default output becomes more user-friendly. Then, the contribution does not clarify the intended use case. Is it intended to be used by humans? If so, why the default Ant output is not enough? Is it supposed to be used for machine integration? (e.g. a CI server parsing log output) If so, why the default Ant's BuildListeners are not enough? This does not look like a low-maintenance contribution to me 🤷♂️ . Replacing log4j2 with slf4j would not answer "what are the use-cases" questions. It is more like low-unmaintenance contribution. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
