Hi folks,
it recently has come to my attention that Commons Logging has been
replaced with Log4J2. Well, I proposed almost two years ago to move to
SLF4J for good reasons [1].
People disagreed that Commons Logging is good enough and this discussion
has been held several times w/o any concensus. Since people also
disgreed this time, I obstained to changed the code even if I disagree
with the consent.
Some time back Oleg raised the same question on the dev mailing list
[2]. The already existing ticket wasn't even put into consideration to
inform all subscribers. Some discussion was held on the mailing list.
The ticket [3] was created w/o any proper description, proposal and
linking to any concensus and boom, a day later it was committed.
As Oleg expressed here [4] a lot of users will be pissed off why they
need now a new facade for a facade to do logging. Infact, as for the
facade all/some the improvements could have landed in SLF4J after all.
If someone wants to use Log4J2 as a logging backend that's perfectly fine.
I am not really satisfied with the course of discussion and
documentation of this change. It could have been way better and will
leave a bad aftertaste. After all, the issue (list) should contain all
necessary information why a change was done. It simple hasn't been done.
I don't expect any client who is upgrading to search mailing lists for
such answers.
At the end, people will add exclusions to their POM, add the SLF4J
bridge and log to whatever they want.
Michael
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCLIENT-1664
[2] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg16743.html
[3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCLIENT-1786
[4] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg17847.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
