On Jul 11, 2008, at 9:35 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
But that is not the case - not at all. JSecurity Logging interfaces (all 2 of them + about 5 implementation classes) is far less than SLF4J, which has at last count 46+ interfaces and classes.
This is not true. You are not speaking solely of the API which is significantly smaller.
Again, I'm talking about a featherweight wrapper - not a full abstraction layer. All I wanted to support out of the box was 3 implementations: A console logger on < JDK 1.3. A JDK 1.4 logger if they don't include any other dependency, and a SLF4J one to handle all other cases. I just love the fact that we wouldn't have forced dependencies. 1 jar. That's just awesome :)
Featherweight is a vague adjective. As I've mentioned before, I'm not sure that the community deserves a dummied down API. If one delivers the same functionality then one ends up with roughly the same API.
Regards, Alan
