Currently it might be necessary to have an abstraction API in some cases, but I don't like the idea of promoting Log4J 2 as the best logging abstraction API. We should promote Log4J 2 as the best complete logging solution for the JVM.
I see the possibility to plug in a different impl into log4j-api as a curious side effect, not a main feature. On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > But we do provide an abstraction API, and in fact some of the design in > has a bit of a LCD feel to it. For example, we do not have a > Logger.setLevel() API. > > For good or bad, some folks DO want an abstracted logging API, and this is > required to get a large stack of 3rd party components working together WRT > logging. > > Gary > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> I think the idea of having an abstraction API for different logging >> implementation is inherently bad. Both commons-logging and SLF4J have >> probably created more problems than they have solved. >> >> One reason I like Log4J 2 is that it doesn't claim to be an abstraction >> API, and I see it as a way to eventually get out of this mess. It have >> plugins (appenders, layouts, etc.) though, and that is good, that's where >> the abstraction layer should be. I hope that one day people will stop using >> commons-logging / SLF4J and use Log4J 2 directly instead. >> >> So I am one of the people who "think that log4j-api isn't analogous to >> slf4j-api where log4j-core is like logback", and I like it that way. >> >> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> However, it is important to remember that SLF4J was created before >>> Logback and was meant to be a new abstraction API. You can see that right >>> here in the archives for this mailing list. >>> >>> OTOH, Log4j 2’s API was created so that “normal” users would be able to >>> know what was safe to code against and what wasn’t. Log4j 1 had lots of >>> problems because users were coding against pretty much all the components >>> and expecting them to remain compatible. >>> >>> In the end, the result is similar. You can use either API and bind with >>> another implementation, however binding with the “targeted” backend is >>> still more efficient. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> On Feb 29, 2016, at 8:27 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Because some people think that log4j-api isn't analogous to slf4j-api >>> where log4j-core is like logback. It's a naming confusion I'd guess. >>> >>> On 29 February 2016 at 03:38, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Why is it important to point out that Log4j 2 has API / impl separation? >>>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Ralph Goers < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Not on that site. The issue he is bringing up was discusses a few >>>>> years ago either on one of our lists. >>>>> >>>>> Ralph >>>>> >>>>> On Feb 26, 2016, at 2:24 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Is that worth pointing out? >>>>> >>>>> Gary >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Ralph Goers < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Well, that is understandable. He has been working on this stuff a >>>>>> long time. And I know he wasn’t happy about the documentation issue, even >>>>>> though all that documentation derived from the log4j 1 manual. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ralph >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 26, 2016, at 2:00 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, seems a little strong a reply. He sure has a lot of emotion >>>>>> attached to the issue! >>>>>> >>>>>> Gary >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Ralph Goers < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Wow. Ceki sure took offense to that! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 26, 2016, at 11:18 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://github.com/swagger-api/swagger-parser/issues/209#issuecomment-189377712 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What can we do to educate and publicize the fact that Log4j 2 is an >>>>>>> API too? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gary >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] >>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] >>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> [image: MagineTV] >>>> >>>> *Mikael Ståldal* >>>> Senior software developer >>>> >>>> *Magine TV* >>>> [email protected] >>>> Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com >>>> <http://www.magine.com/> >>>> >>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this >>>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message >>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may >>>> not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, >>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply >>>> email. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> [image: MagineTV] >> >> *Mikael Ståldal* >> Senior software developer >> >> *Magine TV* >> [email protected] >> Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com >> >> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this >> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message >> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may >> not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, >> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply >> email. >> > > > > -- > E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition > <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > -- [image: MagineTV] *Mikael Ståldal* Senior software developer *Magine TV* [email protected] Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email.
