On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Jeremy Haile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, how exactly are you proposing I use SLF4J with the new code you checked > in? I don't see any support for it...
I haven't implemented that yet - it will take me about 5 minutes, I just didn't have time yesterday > > It sounds like you are talking about doing detection of whether or not the > jar is in the classpath - which would result in the same classloading > hassles that is making everyone switch away from commons-logging to slf4j. > If we followed slf4js approach, then everyone would have to include > jsecurity-slf4j.jar in their classpath, plus slf4j.jar plus slf4j-log4j.jar. > This seems like a needless hassle. I am talking about that, but you're mistaken in that this would cause the same classloading problems seen in Commons Logging. Those CL issues are related to using a class object to initialize a Log instance. I'm not doing that. What I'm talking about is the log framework detection exactly in the same manner that we detect if Ehcache is available. Same technique - unrelated to the Commons Logging CL problems.
