On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:52 PM, Les Hazlewood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Niklas Gustavsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Les Hazlewood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Just out of curiosity though, how come you don't seem to mind the >>> tight-coupling to the SLF4J API as much as I do? In general, >>> tight-coupling of _any_ 3rd party API really really irritates me. >> >> As a fan of the pure SLF4J approach I see SLF4J as the very extension >> to the JRE, something that's always around. One would have hoped that >> JUL would have been just that, but since it's not, SLF4J has had to >> play that roll. I'm thinking that it will be around in the large >> majority of cases where JSecurity is used anyways and therefore see a >> custom logging API as more burden than using SLF4J directly. > > I agree with you, but the sad reality is that SLF4J is not embedded > into the JRE, so therefore I must view it as a proprietary 3rd party > library. And as to its ubiquity, I haven't yet needed to use SLF4J in > any of my most recent projects (and I have a lot of them), nor do any > of the open source projects I use currently require SLF4J (Spring, > caching frameworks, etc).
Well, the uber JAR approach proposed earlier in this thread would indeed take care of just that. > Now of course, the next version of Hibernate will require it, but not > too many others - the huge majority of frameworks still require > Commons Logging. I do feel that this will change over the next year > though, since SLF4J adoption is occurring quite rapidly - which is why > SLF4J is my preferred logging API. JCL will be replaced soon enough > across the board. Most projects that I'm familiar with uses jcl-over-slf4j since no one wants to use JCL these days. If Spring-DM is any indication, Spring might switch over to SLF4J as well. /niklas
