slf4j-log4j12 would still need to be excluded with log4j2, as you must use
slf4j-log4j2. log4j2 its self has a package and coordinate change, so now
people would be excluding sfl4j-log4j12, log4j 1.2 and logback. Switching
to log4j2 does not solve that particular issue and perhaps slightly
exacerbates it.

If the only reason is to have a RFC5424-compliant syslog appender, why not
fix logback's or build a separate one?

*Michael Rose*
Senior Platform Engineer
*Full*Contact | fullcontact.com
<https://www.fullcontact.com/?utm_source=FullContact%20-%20Email%20Signatures&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Signature%20Link&utm_campaign=FullContact%20-%20Email%20Signatures>
m: +1.720.837.1357 | t: @xorlev


All Your Contacts, Updated and In One Place.
Try FullContact for Free
<https://www.fullcontact.com/?utm_source=FullContact%20-%20Email%20Signatures&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Signature%20Link&utm_campaign=FullContact%20-%20Email%20Signatures>

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Harsha <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am +1 on switching to log4j. I second Bobby on excluding log4j and new
> users/devs run into this issue quite often.
> Thanks,
> Harsha
>
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015, at 08:28 AM, Bobby Evans wrote:
> > I haven't seen any reply to this yet. It is a real pain to repeatedly
> > tell our downstream users to run mvn dependecy:tree look for slf4j log4j
> > bindings and exclude them.  That alone is enough for me to say lets
> > switch.
> >  - Bobby
> >
> >
> >      On Monday, February 2, 2015 3:07 PM, Derek Dagit
> >      <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >  In the past, the storm project used log4j version 1.x as its logging
> > framework.  Around the time of 0.9.0, before moving to Apache, the
> > project
> > moved to using logback for two reasons:
> >
> > 1) logback supported rolling log files, which was critical for managing
> > disk
> >   space usage.
> > 2) logback supported dynamically updating its logging configuration
> > files.
> >
> >
> > Recently, we have met a new requirement that we send logs to a syslog
> > daemon
> > for further processing.  The syslog daemon has a particular format
> > described in
> > RFC5424, and using it basically means that things like stack traces have
> > newlines properly contained within a single logging event, instead of
> > written
> > raw into the log making extra parsing necessary.
> >
> > log4j version 2.x (or log4j2) has the following:
> >
> > 1) rolling log files with size, duration, and date-based triggers that
> > can be
> >   composed together
> > 2) dynamic log updates that do not cause log messages to be dropped while
> > the
> >   new config is loaded
> > 3) a Syslog appender that is compliant with RFC5424.
> >
> >
> > I would like to hear developers' opinions on whether it might be good to
> > switch
> > from logback to log4j2 based on the above, or else hear about alternative
> > solutions to the RFC5424 requirement that works well.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --
> > Derek
> >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to