Sandro Martini a écrit : > Just for info, in some projects I'm seeing (even for Logging) a > reactive approach, like logging events sent to a general service bus > and handled there ... but don't know if could be a good choice here. This could be left of for logging implementations to choose their behaviour.
> good, but start with JDK ServiceLoader (at least at the beginning) or > something specific (in Zest codebase) ? Services in Qi4j^WZest are first-class citizens and take part of the whole "Application Structure". So reusing that seems obvious. James Carman a écrit : > From an outsider's > perspective, it just seems silly to put a logging facade over a > logging facade, though. Yeah, a controversial facade for a controversial subject ;) In fact, our logging facade could directly call a logging implementation like logback, without going the SLF4J route. I think the idea here is both to tighten core dependencies and to give users complete control regarding how logging should be handled in their apps. > What do you do when there is no logger? Use > a default no-op implementation or something? Exactly, just as we already do for Metrics. /Paul
