2010/12/10 Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]>

> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 09:34, Achim Nierbeck <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Well with logback you also have some "nice" loggers/appenders like the
> one
> > that zips the log-files,  you would need to re implement.
> > I just don't like the idea of reimplementing if it already exists and I
> just
> > had the feeling since everyone is going to use slf4j and logback it would
> be
> > a better solution.
>
> Yeah, it's a bit sad, but that's also the way i've been pushed too for
> this very issue.
> Pax-logging already includes some additional or enhanced log4j classes
> (the sifting appender), a more complete property configurator ...
>


I'd guess I have to add some more appenders then :)


>
> I guess we could do the opposite and write our own property based
> configuration for logback, but we would still be incompatible (that
> just mean we'd have to bump the major version).   But that's a lot of
> work and i'm not sure to see the benefits of it right now, meaning I
> don't want to spend that much time on this issue.
>
>
Full ACK on this one.



> > On the other hand you are right, the main issue would be that there is
> only
> > the possibility to configure using XML.
> > Since the ConfigAdmin only uses properties, would it be possible to start
> > thinking about a xml based configuration as alternative for the
> ConfigAdmin
> > since in the enterprise world the configurations are usually handled
> through
> > xml files? Just a thought :) But this has basically nothing to do with
> the
> > pax-logging anymore.
> >
> > 2010/12/10 Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> You mean using logback ?
> >> I guess the main problem would be:
> >>  * logback has no property based mechanism, so using ConfigAdmin
> >> would not work out of the box
> >>  * all current configs would be incompatible
> >> Is that just for the sake of it or are you looking to some features
> >> that logback has and pax-logging has not ?
> >>
> >> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 09:20, Achim Nierbeck <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I think your proposal sounds quite good.
> >> > One other thing that comes to my mind talking of pax-logging.
> >> > How much hassle would it be to use the slf4j logging as the basis
> >> > for pax-logging?
> >> >
> >> > 2010/12/10 Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]>
> >> >>
> >> >> I've run into several users that can't really use pax-logging because
> >> >> their bundles import slf4j api 1.6.x package which is not supported
> >> >> atm.
> >> >> The reason it's not is because this api is not binary compatible with
> >> >> 1.5.x which mean we can't really export both packages 1.5 and 1.6
> >> >> using the same real pacakge as it's currently done for 1.4.x and
> >> >> 1.5.x.
> >> >>
> >> >> That said, the incompatibility are quite minors (see below for the
> >> >> full diff) and I think the average people won't see any problems.  So
> >> >> we have several ways going forward:
> >> >>  * just use the 1.6.x api and export 1.4.x and 1.5.x at the same
> >> >> time, hoping that users won't run into those incompabilities
> >> >>  * just use 1.6.x api and not export 1.4 or 1.5 packages
> >> >>  * have a separate bundle exporting the 1.6.x api (and have it wired
> >> >> correctly with pax-logging)
> >> >>  * move 1.5.x package into a separate bundle and use 1.6.x as the
> >> >> current
> >> >> api
> >> >>
> >> >> I suppose most of bundles using the slf4j api would use either an
> open
> >> >> version range such as [1.6,+oo) or a major version range [1.6,2) so I
> >> >> suppose even if we go #3 or #4, it won't actually help people a lot,
> >> >> so i'm tempted to go #2 and if there are any problems reported, go #4
> >> >> and force people to either upgrade to slf4j 1.6 or use a stricter
> >> >> version range (in which case, we wouldn't really need #4 anymore).
> >> >>
> >> >> Thoughts ?
> >> >>
> >> >> gnodet:~/work/japidiff/target$ diff slf4j-api-1.5.11.txt
> >> >> slf4j-api-1.6.0.txt
> >> >> 157a158,167
> >> >> > public class FormattingTuple {
> >> >> >     public static org.slf4j.helpers.FormattingTuple NULL;
> >> >> >     public FormattingTuple(String);
> >> >> >     public FormattingTuple(String, Object[], Throwable);
> >> >> >     public Object[] getArgArray();
> >> >> >     public String getMessage();
> >> >> >     public Throwable getThrowable();
> >> >> > }
> >> >> >
> >> >> > package org.slf4j.helpers;
> >> >> 196,198c206,208
> >> >> <     public static final String arrayFormat(String, Object[]);
> >> >> <     public static final String format(String, Object);
> >> >> <     public static final String format(String, Object, Object);
> >> >> ---
> >> >> >     public static final org.slf4j.helpers.FormattingTuple
> >> >> > arrayFormat(String, Object[]);
> >> >> >     public static final org.slf4j.helpers.FormattingTuple
> >> >> > format(String,
> >> >> > Object);
> >> >> >     public static final org.slf4j.helpers.FormattingTuple
> >> >> > format(String,
> >> >> > Object, Object);
> >> >> 239,240c249,256
> >> >> < public class NOPMakerAdapter implements org.slf4j.spi.MDCAdapter {
> >> >> <     public NOPMakerAdapter();
> >> >> ---
> >> >> > public class NOPLoggerFactory implements org.slf4j.ILoggerFactory {
> >> >> >     public NOPLoggerFactory();
> >> >> >     public org.slf4j.Logger getLogger(String);
> >> >> > }
> >> >> >
> >> >> > package org.slf4j.helpers;
> >> >> > public class NOPMDCAdapter implements org.slf4j.spi.MDCAdapter {
> >> >> >     public NOPMDCAdapter();
> >> >> 259,260c275,276
> >> >> <     public static final void reportFailure(String);
> >> >> <     public static final void reportFailure(String, Throwable);
> >> >> ---
> >> >> >     public static final void report(String);
> >> >> >     public static final void report(String, Throwable);
> >> >> 270c286
> >> >> <     void log(org.slf4j.Marker, String, int, String, Throwable);
> >> >> ---
> >> >> >     void log(org.slf4j.Marker, String, int, String, Object[],
> >> >> > Throwable);
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Cheers,
> >> >> Guillaume Nodet
> >> >> ------------------------
> >> >> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >> >> ------------------------
> >> >> Open Source SOA
> >> >> http://fusesource.com
> >> >>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> general mailing list
> >> >> [email protected]
> >> >> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Cheers,
> >> Guillaume Nodet
> >> ------------------------
> >> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >> ------------------------
> >> Open Source SOA
> >> http://fusesource.com
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general

Reply via email to