hi carlos,

i won't join the next long discussion about logging frameworks (just because
such a discussion won't lead to a solution which works for most users -
there are just too many completely different opinions out there).

don't get me wrong - slf4j is a nice framework. in fact my original
suggestion was to use it for all myfaces sub-projects.

i just provided the result of a lot of very long and detailed discussions in
the myfaces community.
-> we can benefit from these discussions or we just ignore them. (both cases
might lead to additional online and/or offline discussions.)

regards,
gerhard

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces



2010/5/24 Carlos Vara <[email protected]>

> > there is a jul to slf4j bridge -> users would still have the choice.
>
> Yep, but if I remember it right, that bridge offers bad performance as
> there is no way to re-implement jul classes so it has to translate the
> logging messages.
>
> Log4j and commons logging bridges don't have that problem.
>
> Regards,
> Carlos
>
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
> >
> >
> > 2010/5/24 Donald Woods <[email protected]>
> >
> > > Moving to the SLF4J API would be nice, in that then users can choose
> > > which logger they want - Log4J, Jul, Simple, None, ....
> > >
> > > But, I see this as a 0.2 improvement and not as a stop-ship requirement
> > > for a 0.1-incubating release.
> > >
> > >
> > > -Donald
> > >
> > >
> > > On 5/24/10 4:27 AM, Carlos Vara wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> 3. Is anyone interested in using slf4j instead of commons-logging?
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I am. At the moment I'm using a config similar to the one described
> here:
> > > >
> http://blog.springsource.com/2009/12/04/logging-dependencies-in-spring/,
> > > > which adds a bit of complexity in the pom but works fine.
> > > >
> > > > However, if dropping commons-logging (before or after the release) is
> an
> > > > option, I volunteer to do the necessary changes in the code to
> migrate to
> > > > slf4j.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Carlos
> > > >
> > >
>

Reply via email to