Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen wrote:
As such I see no reason not to promote logback - you just need to communicate very clearly that you are advertising for some other software that happens to have been written by you. IMHO that is better than the official slf4j text is biased instead of neutral.
It is a question of balance. While over-publicizing logback within the context of SLF4J may be unwarranted, I think discreetly mentioning logback as direct implementation of SLF4J, as is done in revision 1325 [1], strikes a reasonable balance. Logback is after all the only direct implementation of SLF4J and deserves credit for that. If other logging systems decide to implement SLF4J directly, they will also be mentioned in a such. I think such a policy establishes a fair playing ground for all logging systems within the SLF4J project. In summary, while having a separate section on logback in the SLF4J manual may be unwarranted, mentioning logback as a direct implementation, following a list of other SLF4J bindings, is quite fair. If you agree, I will publish the new version of the manual on http://slf4j.org. [1] http://svn.slf4j.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=1325 -- Ceki Gülcü Logback: The reliable, generic, fast and flexible logging framework for Java. http://logback.qos.ch _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@slf4j.org http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
