On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Shawn Heisey <s...@elyograg.org> wrote:
> On 5/22/2013 8:38 PM, Robert Muir wrote: > > I looked at this: i dont think this module should rely upon slf4j. > > Just for clarity sake: You are only advocating that the slf4j be removed > from this particular test, right? Lucene (including its tests) should > have only logging dependencies that cannot be avoided. In this case, > the slf4j dependency can be avoided. > > I'm ask this clarification question because I don't think we want to > have anyone trying to actively remove slf4j dependencies from Solr > tests. Solr uses slf4j extensively, but as an actual server product > rather than a development API, this makes sense. > > It does not make sense even for solr tests, why wouldnt tests just use System.err.println? Why make things complicated?
