On 11.10.2012 11:18, Mark Struberg wrote:
Oh I missed one more constellation
a plugin could have slf4j-1.5.x + a logging backend we do not know of.
I hope such things dont often exist, but in theory it could happen.
For all of those cases we need isolation.
A few months before creating the SLF4J project, I had a lengthy
conversation on the commons-dev mailing list about logging scenarios.
Richard Sitze (from IBM) offered a number of complex scenarios, and
that's when the penny finally dropped for me [1]. It is a waste of time
catering for all imaginable logging scenarios. The space of possible
logging scenarios is truly vast. However, only a very limited number of
these scenarios occur in practice. It makes more sense to concentrate
on the common scenarios to ensure that they are well supported.
More concretely, I propose that we find one or two examples of plugins
declaring an slf4j dependency and test these plugins with the upcoming
version of maven (the one using slf4j).
[1] http://marc.info/?t=110780972600001&r=1&w=2
--
Ceki
65% of statistics are made up on the spot
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
