over-engineering + reinvent-the-wheel when it is a trivial exercise < no coupling to 3rd party dependencies + 100% backward and forward compatibility
I know you don't feel the same way, but I feel strongly about this architectural principal. On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Jeremy Haile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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 >>>> >>> >>> > >
