JSecurity Code -> Logging Abstraction -> Logging Abstraction ->
Logging Framework
=
over-engineering + reinvent-the-wheel
On Jul 11, 2008, at 12:08 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
You seem to ignore that this is absolutely possible with my approach.
Drop in Jsecurity.jar, slf4j.jar and your custom SLF4J implementation,
and it works. No JSecurity-specific configuration required.
My suggestion affords more possibilities than with SLF4J alone.
That's the bottom line and what this is all about. For the extremely
minimal effort, it is a no-brainer for me.
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Jeremy Haile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
An organization is going to get much more bang for their buck to
write an
adapter for SLF4J or commons-logging. Because ANY open source
project they
use is going to use that.
I would go INSANE if I had to write a custom log adapter for every
open
source project library I depended on. Can you imagine that?
This is PRECISELY the reason that SLF4J and commons-logging exist -
to
prevent practices like this. This is a practice that was common in
the
early 90s, before commons-logging caught on.
On Jul 11, 2008, at 12:00 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On Jul 11, 2008, at 8:23 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
C'mon guys - I'm not asking you to do _anything_. There is
literally
NOTHING that you have to do. It already works! It enables more
end-users! Why on earth would you want to shut this down when
there
are _NO_ negative effects? I just don't get that. Just use it
and be
happy! Why can't you let me have this? :)
Why can't your contract pay you to implement an SLF4J -> Acme Co
logging
adapter? Seems like they would then get more bang for their buck
as it
would be applicable to other projects as well.
Regards,
Alan
