Le 04/10/2026 à 09:54, Claude Warren a écrit :
Yes you can change logging on the fly but the point in time where you
realize you need detailed logging is after the event has happened. Hence
the capture everything and figure out what to write at the end of some sort
of time box strategy strategy
In my opinion, a Maven problem is that it chooses to reinvent its own
Logging interface instead of using java.util.logging (no need for
external dependencies such as SL4FJ. The java.util.logging API is rich
enough). The Maven interface is very minimalist, while the
java.util.logging API collects much more information: source class,
source method, thread ID, timestamp, etc. It also defines a XML format
where all those information can be saved:
https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/25/core/java-logging-overview.html#GUID-84971801-F327-4F96-8F35-DA4D6737F857
Using java.util.logging in Maven would have allowed to show only the
most important log records in the console and optionally save more
records in an XML file. Users would have richer information for
filtering records in that file.
Using the Maven Logging interface as a facade for java.util.logging does
not fully work. Java logging uses reflection for filling automatically
the source class and source method information. When using a facade,
java.util.logging thinks that all log records come from the facade.
Information about the real originator of the log record is lost.
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
