David M. Lloyd wrote:
My point is, as a framework, MINA should work to avoid imposing this
preference upon the consumer of the framework. That's just "friendly"
programming practice: make as few assumptions as possible about the
user's environment, and impose as few constraints as possible.
What about completly remove logs from MINA? Anyway, logs are for dummies
: real programmer not only don't eat quiches, but also don't need logs
because their code is bulletproof.
As Marteen perfectly said : live with it. I assure you that it worth the
try. I think almost all of the Apache projects are using more than one
framework and more than one logger, without any kind of problem for
their users (thanks to the committers who do their best to make this
work for users)
So, you would be better off trying to convince the teams of these
non-ASF projects to switch their logging framework ?
To SLF4J? I'm not as optimistic about my chances to get a non-ASF
project to use an ASF logging framework, as I am that I can convince an
ASF project to make their logging optional.
I think that the vast majority of the projects is using log4j right now,
then common-logging might be second, and at the end of the feed chain,
you have slf4j and JCL. I personnaly have worked on a couple of projects
those last 10 years, none of them were using JCL. And I find slf4j a
convenient way to solve a lot of class-loader issues. We are using it in
ADS, and we are quite pleased with it.
Bringing peace in the middle-east is probably easier than convincing
someone to switch from his favorite logger to another one...
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
