Actually yes but it also adds extra jars. Instead of adding extra jars could
we use it with reflection mechanism? WDYT? If it really needs a jar on
classpath, then I think we can live with it.

I am also +1 on using slf4j after reading some documents :)

Thanks;

--Gurkan

2010/2/25 James Carman <[email protected]>

> -1 to #3, why re-invent the wheel?  It's more code that you have to
> implement, test, maintain, and enhance.
>
> +1 to #2 and SLF4J
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 2:11 AM, Gurkan Erdogdu
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi;
> >
> > Last couple of days there were some good discussion on how to proceed
> with
> > logging in OWB. There are some approaches:
> >
> > 1* Remove any hard log dependency library from classpath(For example :
> > removing log4.jar from classpath) and use java logging.
> > 2* Use some third-party facades, for example using commons-logging and
> slf4j
> > etc. I read many complaints about using commons-logging in projects
> because
> > of classloading issues and memory leaks etc. But no knowledge on using
> > slf4j.
> > 3* Define our own interface and implement it with other logger
> frameworks.
> > At runtime, OWB selects which one to use.
> >
> > Related issue is : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-300
> >
> > My Comment:
> > ----------------------
> > I do not think that using only standard java logging is good. Clients
> want
> > to use other logging frameworks with OWB replacing standard java logging.
> > But also, I do not want that logging will be the most complex part of the
> > OWB. Logging must be simple.
> >
> > Instead of using third party libraries and their jars (managing their
> jars,
> > adding extra classpath jars etc.), I just want to create a our own simple
> > facade(interface),and implement it with "log4j" and "java logging". But
> > log4j.jar will be optional in "pom.xml" therefore there is no hard
> > dependency to log4j.jar. After that we can provide configuration options
> to
> > clients which logging framework they use. (Using system properties, owb
> > configuration file etc.).Standard logging will be Java Logging. If anyone
> > really wants to use another logging framework, it must implement and
> > contribute :)
> >
> > +1 for the item (3)
> >
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > --Gurkan
> >
>



-- 
Gurkan Erdogdu
http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com

Reply via email to