Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen wrote:
I believe that Curt Arnold may be somewhat right in that this is a matter of Apache endorsement. This is purely guesswork. I still think that log4j should have a "Best practices" list, where the "use slf4j framework" should be on the list for backend independence, to inform the users as early as possible.
Sigh. My proposal is a wake up call for log4j. The project can go back to slumber or come back to life by providing a valuable new feature to the java developer community. Poohing my proposal under the pretext that it is a grab at Apache brand is extremely offensive. A little modesty regarding the importance of the Apache or log4j brands, would be a welcome change.
You have a very valid point here. slf4j has not quite settled down yet - IMO - regarding features and releases so it would make perfect sense to keep log4j and slf4j distinct and disentangled.
SLF4J has not settled down? What do you mean exactly? Do mean slf4j-ext (slf4j-extensions) or slf4j-api?
-- Ceki Gülcü Logback: The reliable, generic, fast and flexible logging framework for Java. http://logback.qos.ch --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
