On 9/12/07, Maarten Bosteels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello community, > > On the trunk, most mina sub-projects have a dependency on slf4j-simple, with > scope = test > > <dependency> > <groupId>org.slf4j</groupId> > <artifactId>slf4j-simple</artifactId> > <version>1.4.3</version> > <scope>test</scope> > </dependency> > > But mina-example has a dependency on slf4j-log4j12 with scope=runtime.
It's because it's an example. Example needs at least one binding at runtime. > When I generate IDEA projects files using mvn idea:idea > the mina-example module has two slf4j bindings in its classpath: > slf4j-log4j12 because it's in the pom.xml > slf4j-simple because the module depends on the mina-core module > > As a consequence, when I am running examples from within IDEA, > it's unpredictable which binding will be used. > > I haven't tried this in eclipse, but I suspect the problem will exist there > as well. > > So I think we should use the same slf4j binding for all modules. > I would propose slf4j-log4j12 because it is of course far more flexible than > slf4j-simple. > Besides, I am writing a test-case for the MDCInjectionFilter that depends on > log4j. > > Note this change doesn't affect the users of MINA at all: they can still use > the slf4j binding of their choice. > > What do you guys think ? You made a good point. Let's move on to slf4j-log4j12. > (thanks for reading this far) I wouldn't mind your post! Trustin -- what we call human nature is actually human habit -- http://gleamynode.net/ -- PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
