There's a way many projects are using this embedding of SLF4J API in their
apps even transposing the package name btw. There's support to do stuff
like this in SLF4J I think. Might be worth looking at this.
Alex
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Les Hazlewood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, of course, but that doesn't change the fact that we've got a
> mandatory dependency that _could_ be avoided for simpler deployments.
> I just happen to value that more than most apparently :)
>
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Jul 11, 2008, at 9:49 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
> >
> >> 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.
> >>
> >> That's very true. But I think that's the issue - JSecurity doesn't
> >> use any of the more robust functionality that SLF4J might provide. We
> >> always do this:
> >>
> >> if ( isBlahEnabled() ) {
> >> log.blah(...);
> >> }
> >>
> >> We never use anything else. So the wrapper API I came up with only
> >> supports that. Now if we were going to use features like <a
> >> href="http://www.slf4j.org/manual.html#mdc";>Mapped Diagnostic
> >> Contexts</a>, then sure, a 1-to-1 overlap would be the case and of
> >> lesser value.
> >>
> >> But yes, it is 'dummied down' as you say to only support what we need.
> >> Again, its reducing coupling that is my favorite aspect, not so much
> >> the overlap.
> >>
> >
> > So, then it should be crazy easy for you to implement your
> >
> > SLF4J -> Acme Co Logging adapter
> >
> > no?
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Alan
> >
> >
>
--
Microsoft gives you Windows, Linux gives you the whole house ...
