Here's my suggestion: We keep the current state where we have the new logging API (slf4j) and the System.out style implementation. Then we (Olivier?) create a JIRA ticket for moving to a different logging implementation using a more flexible logging framework. Then we discuss the benefits of doing that move. We could even ask the users if it is something that people even want.
/Anders On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote: > > On Nov 11, 2012, at 2:49 AM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Perso I propose a change by pointing you (you means other maven dev > > folks too) to a branch I made somewhere but you commit code without > > listening POV from others. > > If you could wait to hear what other thinks that could be lovely.... > > I believe you do exactly what you accuse me of Olivier. You did not > propose a change, you pointed to your branch with a terse "fixed" as if it > were a foregone conclusion. > > I started the SLF4J work, I worked with Ceki to try and minimize the > change, keep the ITs passing while preserving the existing behaviour and > keeping the dependency size and complexity to a minimum. > > I've been working on restoring the behaviour and my goal, at least, was to > reduce the possible complication of using a larger framework. The second I > created the JIRA issue, you point at your branch and say "fixed" without > any explanation. You used the console transfer listener not working -- and > I admit that was annoying and I apologize for leaving it like that so long > -- as a vehicle for adding your preferred logging framework. My goal was to > introduce SLF4J in a minimal way, at least to start. So if that conflicts > with your goal then that's fine but jumping in the middle of the work I'm > doing with a change that proposes to throw away the work I did with SLF4J > Simple is not fine. Couching it as me not taking into account a wider > discussion as a response to me finishing what I started with a veto even > less so. > > I didn't change any of the dependencies, completed the work I started and > fixed what I broke which I believe is reasonable. > > If the discussion is now transitioning to users want flexible logging and > the choice of a logging framework that's fine. But I still maintain the CLI > use of logging can be limited and constrained while allowing integrators to > make the small changes necessary to add flexible logging. But if we want to > choose a framework let's look at the options, if people want to go that > route, and select the best option. > > Reverting my commit will break the console transfer listener. The > discussion about the use of a logging framework, and its choice if so > decided, is not a foregone conclusion. So I will revert my commit in the > morning when I wake up if you want the broken behaviour restored. But note > I believe you are being unreasonable in that you haven't said a word until > I raised the JIRA issue today and then took offense to me finishing my work > while I was in the process of correcting what I broke. Obviously you were > working on your branch while I was working on my fixes but nothing was > brought up aside from JIRA. > > You have made sweeping changes in the transport and while you have made > improvements, you have introduced several things that don't work as they > did previously -- and I have brought these up with you directly, especially > as it pertains to security -- I have not jumped down your throat with a > veto as I expect you will eventually fix them because you care about users. > Please do me the same courtesy. > > > > > > >> > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> -- > >>> Olivier Lamy > >>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com > >>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > >>> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >>> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Jason > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------- > >> Jason van Zyl > >> Founder & CTO, Sonatype > >> Founder, Apache Maven > >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > >> --------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> We all have problems. How we deal with them is a measure of our worth. > >> > >> -- Unknown > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Olivier Lamy > > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > Thanks, > > Jason > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Jason van Zyl > Founder & CTO, Sonatype > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > --------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > >
