trying to be concise and neutral 1. because slf4j-api is well known, it has lots of back-ends, that will provide powerfull configuration techniques for filtering, display, recording and so on Maven output: precise use case still need to be described
2. the discussion is not much about the api but about the default back-end that will be shipped with Maven: there is no consensus, then the actual strategy is to start with slf4j-simple in Maven 3.1.0 then have a vote to choose which more complete implementation will go in Maven 3.1.1+ Regards, Hervé Le dimanche 9 décembre 2012 22:18:51 Chris Graham a écrit : > I got lost (in other work) and this thread a long time ago. > > Can someone please remind me just why we are changing the logging at all? > > -Chris > > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 5:52 AM, Kristian Rosenvold < > > kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2012/12/9 Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>: > > > Perso I'm fine using log4j2. > > > I use the branch I pushed for some weeks now and I'm happy. > > > Log4j2 has quickly added a feature I needed and release it. > > > Furthermore I'm fine working with an Apache community in case of any > > > issue we could have. > > > > I'm not entirely sure I follow where this discussion is actually > > going, but I'm firmly opposed > > to including a brand new logging framework as default in m3. > > > > Kristian > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
