[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6305?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15289520#comment-15289520
]
Sean Owen commented on SPARK-6305:
----------------------------------
Although I agree with the general big problem of dependency leakage, I am not
sure if this is an instance. Spark has to interact with some specific logging
framework in order to control logging levels. Otherwise this would be trivial.
That aside, I think logging dependencies are so ubiquitous from third-party
dependencies that, Spark or no, any downstream consumer probably has to deal
with excluding something. log4j 1.x is one of the least problematic choices to
make.
I don't think an epic would help, but, talking about shading particular
dependencies would. What do you have in mind? in many cases there are sad
stories about why it won't help. Why is shading a bad thing?
> Add support for log4j 2.x to Spark
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: SPARK-6305
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6305
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Build
> Reporter: Tal Sliwowicz
> Priority: Minor
>
> log4j 2 requires replacing the slf4j binding and adding the log4j jars in the
> classpath. Since there are shaded jars, it must be done during the build.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
