I'm hearing both: a) have UIMA not log anything unless it is "provided with" some logger back end. In other words, the core UIMA without a back end should run with no logging (and hopefully, no delays for logging calls).
b) have UIMA in some new-user-getting-started configuration see logs by default. Is this correct? If so, it seems we need to have some way to package UIMA to have this user-getting-started configuration by default, which can be stripped out for case (a). Does this sound right? -Marshall On 2/15/2017 8:05 AM, Joern Kottmann wrote: > Right, in your example you don't want to have logging on by default on a > high level like INFO. > You would probably want to see error or warning log messages. > > Anyway back to my case. We should still make sure that users who just get > started see the logs by default. > The eclipse runner plugin could always output logs to the console or maybe > even have a tab to configure it. > > If we have some runner command for an AE or AAE that could make sure logs > are printed to the console people who do more serious applications should > invest time to configure the logging like they need it if the default is > not sufficient. > > Jörn > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Thilo Goetz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 14/02/2017 15:29, Joern Kottmann wrote: >> >>> A common case we will have is a user who is ignorant about the logging and >>> doesn't care about it, for him - out of the box - the log messages should >>> be printed to the console. >>> >> I disagree. UIMA is a library that is usually embedded in another >> application. By default, it should not do any logging at all. Please think >> about people who use UIMA in contexts where we don't have control over the >> startup of the VM, such as Hadoop or Spark. The fact that I can't turn off >> logging without providing some sort of config file for the VM at startup >> time is a major pain in the neck, at least for me. It is not just annoying, >> it is a real issue when you process thousands of documents per second and >> UIMA insists on logging several lines for each of them. Please make it stop. >> >> --Thilo >> >> >> Is that possible with sl4j? >>> >>> Jörn >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho < >>> [email protected] >>> >>>> wrote: >>>> On 06.02.2017, at 21:39, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> now considering not using logback except via eclipse plugin dependency, >>>>> >>>> to avoid >>>> >>>>> license reciprocity issue. >>>>> >>>>> For normal binary packaging, would use slf4j + some backend, perhaps >>>>> >>>> log4j 2. >>>> >>>>> These would be "excluded" for the OSGi packaging. >>>>> >>>> UIMA as a library should not have dependencies on a particular logging >>>> backend. >>>> >>>> I guess when you talk about "normal binary packaging" you mean the binary >>>> release >>>> package that we do, right? >>>> >>>> So these instead of "excluding" a logging backend for OSGi, I think it >>>> would rather >>>> be "including" a logging backend only for OSGi and the binary packaging >>>> but not >>>> having it in any other way as a dependency in any POM (except maybe as a >>>> test dependency). >>>> >>>> -- Richard >>>>
