Ralph
On Nov 1, 2012, at 9:15 AM, Jacob Kjome wrote:
"log4j-slf4j" or "slf4j-log4j"? Or, maybe more consistently,
"slf4j-log4j2"?
The SLF4j binding for Log4j-1.2.x is "slf4j-log4j12". Seems like the
SLF4j project has defined the naming scheme already. I'm not sure I see a
point in straying from it? Or am I missing something?
Jake
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 09:08:37 -0700
Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
After this discussion I think I am inclined to agree. Based on that I
think I will just remove it.
Gary does have a valid point about the jar names, although we could
probably argue about them all day. The only one that really bothers me is
slf4j-impl. I guess I would prefer log4j-slf4j. I don't think adding
-adpater to all of them is really necessary to know what they are.
Ralph
On Nov 1, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
I see your point. I was confused at first, thinking you guys wanted an
everything-in-one jar, but all you were talking about was api + core. My
apologies. I am not in favor of the combined jar. I the name is confusing
and don't see much benefit. I personally would rather keep the 2 artifacts
separate. Paul
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
api and core are still (and would be) separate components in SVN, javadocs
and other documentation on the site. All I proposed doing was also
delivering a jar that merges the two. FWIW, API has no dependencies. Core
only has optional dependencies. So the combined jar isn't much different
from core in that respect. I do understand your concern that the "-all"
jar would have lots of optional dependencies that aren't optional if you
really want to use the component (this is especially true of Flume). That
is why I didn't create a "-all" jar and I'm not as much in favor of it.
Ralph
On Nov 1, 2012, at 8:09 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
The nice thing about keeping api divided from core is simply design. There
may be no reason to keep this split unless we can always ensure core will
not require more dependencies. It might be safer to keep them divided. I am
not too fond of the "impl" but would rather see "adapter" since that's
really what the jar represents. It's an adaptive implementation of another
person's API. For example, log4j-slf4j-adapter is much more expressive to
me.
Just my 2 cents.
Paul
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Ralph Goers <rgo...@apache.org> wrote:
OK. The current combined jar only includes API and core and has no
required dependencies that are different than core. I am imagining that
many will prefer to use this single jar instead of having to include both
the API and core jars. What is your opinion on that and if positive, what
would you name it?
Let's see, if we have an api + core jar, then that means you can use Log4J
out of the box with the one jar (as you could with -all), maybe
log4j-standalone? Or just log4j?
Should "log4j-core" be "log4j-impl"?
Why is it slf4j-impl and not log4j-slf4j-impl or log4j-slf4j?
Why is it log4j-jcl and not log4j-jcl-impl?
It seems we should have a naming pattern for bridges to other logging
systems, either the name or name-impl.
We could then have:
log4j-impl
log4j-jcl-impl
log4j-slf4j-impl
and:
log4j-api
Then the combos:
log4j-all
log4j-standalone
Gary
Ralph
On Nov 1, 2012, at 6:51 AM, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote:
I may have misunderstood, but I'll give it another shot!
I don't like combined jars. It's because there's too many dependencies
associated with them. It makes the POM kind of worthless because any
extensions are all <optional>true</option> ... so you have to go manually
add those to your Maven project anyway to get them. I think that kind of
defeats the purpose of an all-in-one jar.
My only point was if there is a combined jar that has everything, call it
"-all" not "-combined"
Paul
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 7:19 AM, Tushar Kapila <tgkp...@gmail.com> wrote:
I prefer all.jar or ApiAndCore.jar
Even if OSes accept special characters there will always be closed systems
that do not. Exampple hyphen is okay in a domain name but one of the visa
test pit's don't like them
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
--
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org JUnit in Action, 2nd
Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
