GOODBOY008 commented on PR #768: URL: https://github.com/apache/fesod/pull/768#issuecomment-3698595048
@alaahong It’s fine for me to upgrade SLF4J to 2.x, as long as we can reach a consensus.Considered both options—upgrading SLF4J and staying with SLF4J 1.7.x. To minimize risk and scope of change, I chose the minimal-change approach by downgrading logback-classic. ## Issue： ### Compatibility Issue - Logback 1.5.x requires SLF4J 2.0.x, but this project uses SLF4J 1.7.36 ### Redundant Issue - The project has both slf4j-simple and logback-classic as test dependencies,slf4j-simple and logback-classic are competing SLF4J implementations ### Log output in console (Before) <img width="2540" height="984" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/dc6b7eba-d8dc-495f-83fc-985f86df9483"; /> ### Log output in console (Remove slf4j-simple) <img width="3242" height="740" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/070dfa45-1fc4-45c9-800a-da27c91fb40f"; /> ### Log output in console (Apply the current pr) <img width="3530" height="1208" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7711e479-00f8-44a4-8eb1-d3d58f8263b5"; /> -- 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: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
