Looks good me.

Thank you,

Tim

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Dominik Stadler <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 2:40:17 AM
To: POI Developers List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Log4j

The page is updated now to focus more on the state since Apache POI 5.1.0
and it also describes the options with slf4j a bit more.

Let us know if you think more content would be useful.

Thanks... Dominik.

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:12 PM Timothy Spear <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ah, then the second line in the link below states POI from 5.1.0 uses log4j
> directly left myself and a few other developers confused. Probably should
> have just checked the code. Did not think of that until you replied....
> https://poi.apache.org/components/logging.html
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 5:00 PM PJ Fanning <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > We do use a facade - log4j-api - you can then choose which compatible
> impl
> > to use.
> > * log4j-core is one impl
> > * log4j-slf4j-impl is an impl that bridges to slf4j -
> > https://github.com/pjfanning/poi-gradle-example/blob/main/build.gradle
> > uses that bridge and use slf4j-simple as the log framework.
> >
> > https://poi.apache.org/components/logging.html has extra details.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thursday 24 March 2022, 21:50:13 GMT+1, Timothy Spear <
> [email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Curious,
> >
> > I could not find in any ticket, wiki or documentation. Why the switch
> from
> > a facade like SL4J to direct log4j as the logging engine? Going direct
> to a
> > logging engine has caused me module conflicts and classpath problems as
> > multiple competing logging engines are required by separate libraries.
> >
> > A facade such as SLF4J eliminates most of these types of issues.
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to