I haven't run in to it. But I'd rather avoid it entirely if we don't have to worry about it. Let the user decide if it is important to them by including jcl-over-slf4j.jar if they want to or not.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:48 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote: > > 5. If we force slf4j, 2 different jsecurity-enabled applications in same >> JVM are forced to use the same logging infrastructure. We shouldn't >> force >> that condition on anyone if we can avoid it (which we can), but the >> end-user >> can enable it fine via #4 if want. >> > > Just curious. Is this really an issue? Why would anyone want to use > different logging infrastructures in the same JVM? Has anyone actually run > into this requirement? > > > Regards, > Alan > >
