Hi Ralph, Ralph Goers wrote at Mittwoch, 22. April 2009 05:19:
[snip] > Does it really matter that you understand what they are trying to do? > What should matter is what they are trying to do doesn't work properly > and they couldn't find a work around. Did anyone of them ask here and try to explain the situation? All I ever here is "it's a known issue that CL does not work, so let's switch". What a great reasoning. > I'm still at a loss as to how this conversation has devolved to this. > This post was meant as an example as to why yet another project is > switching away from Commons Logging. Yes, and they are switching probably for the wrong reasons. If they really expect the classloading issues going away with SLF4J, I wonder, if they really tested webapps that make usage of SLF4J themselves under the same conditions. > I'll ask again. What is next for Commons Logging? Is there any point > in enhancing it to emulate SLF4J? Should it just stay more or less as > it is while it slowly loses its customer base? This is more a consequence of a lot of FUD that is currently around. Yes, there have been problems, but that's why version 1.1.1 is around. See that guy raising the last issue in JIRA for a WebLogic 10.x instance, he's still using 1.0.4. Therefore why is it necessary to use SLF4J in CC, when all other commons components use CL? - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
