You made many good points but I need to correct some.
On Dec 18, 2007 3:51 PM, Alex Karasulu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip/
(4) I won't go into detail to keep some things private but I know you wanted
to find this thread [1] because it was one which you suspected was a veto
against you. You
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:01:40 +0900
Trustin Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 3:34 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Trustin Lee wrote:
snip/
However, taking
the item #4 into picture, it leads me to think we need a thin
built-in layer for logging that is
On Dec 18, 2007 5:38 PM, Julien Vermillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:01:40 +0900
Trustin Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 3:34 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Trustin Lee wrote:
snip/
However, taking
the item #4 into
On Dec 18, 2007 9:28 AM, Trustin Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You made many good points but I need to correct some.
On Dec 18, 2007 3:51 PM, Alex Karasulu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip/
(4) I won't go into detail to keep some things private but I know you wanted
to find this thread [1]
On Dec 18, 2007 5:53 PM, Maarten Bosteels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 9:28 AM, Trustin Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You made many good points but I need to correct some.
On Dec 18, 2007 3:51 PM, Alex Karasulu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip/
(4) I won't go into detail to
Trustin Lee wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 3:34 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Trustin Lee wrote:
snip/
However, taking
the item #4 into picture, it leads me to think we need a thin built-in
layer for logging that is dedicated to MINA.
Please, don't ! This is
Hi Trustin,
I think that everybody should keep calm and peaceful. What are we
discussing about ? A logging framework and nothing else.
As you said, you have added a page explaining how to use SLF4J with MINA
and another project. It works, it is simple, and you have added the full
howto. So
Trustin Lee wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 5:38 PM, Julien Vermillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We all agree configuring slf4j is a piece of cake (drop the good jar).
I can understand seeing another jar in the dependencies list can annoy
some potential MINA users (who said politics ?:D).
Ok, I
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:39:00 +0100
Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Trustin Lee wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 5:38 PM, Julien Vermillard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
We all agree configuring slf4j is a piece of cake (drop the good
jar).
I can understand seeing another jar in the
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:32:41 +0100
Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Trustin,
I think that everybody should keep calm and peaceful. What are we
discussing about ? A logging framework and nothing else.
As you said, you have added a page explaining how to use SLF4J with
MINA
On Dec 18, 2007 10:47 AM, Julien Vermillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:32:41 +0100
Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Trustin,
I think that everybody should keep calm and peaceful. What are we
discussing about ? A logging framework and nothing else.
Julien Vermillard wrote:
Ok, I open my client project today, and what do I see ? more than 60
f**ing jars. What kind of problem can it be to add one more jar ???
Maven, maven, maven !
A real problem is trying to deploy native libs with maven and trying to
find a nice solution in the
Julien Vermillard wrote:
mina.jar bundled with
slf4j-nop will be fine and will hurt nobody.
I buy this idea !
Thanks Julien !
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
On Dec 18, 2007 6:58 PM, Maarten Bosteels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 10:47 AM, Julien Vermillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:32:41 +0100
Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Trustin,
I think that everybody should keep calm and peaceful.
On Dec 18, 2007 4:47 AM, Julien Vermillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:32:41 +0100
Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Trustin,
I think that everybody should keep calm and peaceful. What are we
discussing about ? A logging framework and nothing else.
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:08:15 -0500
Alex Karasulu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 4:47 AM, Julien Vermillard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:32:41 +0100
Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Trustin,
I think that everybody should keep calm and
On Dec 17, 2007, at 8:46 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
Therefore I am making an effort to convince the author(s) of these
frameworks upon which my project relies, to consider making logging
either configurable with no dependencies, or optional altogether.
Using JDK logging seems like a reasonable
Hello all,
On Dec 17, 2007 6:25 AM, Trustin Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Maarten,
On Dec 15, 2007 3:26 AM, Maarten Bosteels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
about (4) : I thought the deadlock is caused by a bug in log4j (namely that
it doesn't use proper synchronization) ?
If that's the case
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:29:24 +0100 Maarten Bosteels
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree, there are currently two logging facades that are widely used
by frameworks/libraries: jakarta-commons-logging (JCL) and SLF4J.
The consequence is that for any project with dependencies, there is a
reasonable
David M. Lloyd wrote:
How would you feel about things if MINA required slf4j AND jcl AND
log4j? That would seem excessive, would it not? It might even affect
one's willingness to use the framework.
This is the situation that I (and others with whom I work) face
currently. As a framework
Trustin Lee wrote:
snip/
However, taking
the item #4 into picture, it leads me to think we need a thin built-in
layer for logging that is dedicated to MINA.
Please, don't ! This is MINA, a Network framework, not a Logger
framework ! We already have so many meta-meta-meta-loger around
On Dec 17, 2007 11:29 AM, Maarten Bosteels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 17, 2007 6:25 AM, Trustin Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
We can ask Log4J team to fix this issue and it will be fixed, but,
again, considering that people wants to use the older version of Log4J
or doesn't want
Hi David,
On Dec 17, 2007 5:46 PM, David M. Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:29:24 +0100 Maarten Bosteels
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree, there are currently two logging facades that are widely used
by frameworks/libraries: jakarta-commons-logging (JCL) and SLF4J.
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:11:20 +0100
Maarten Bosteels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi David,
Some people have feelings stronger than preference about it. Also keep
in mind: you've got an application. You are not developing a framework.
How would you feel about things if MINA required slf4j
Hi Alex,
In reference to the MINA-based appender re-entrance problem as described in
http://xrl.us/bctaa , I would suggest that logging from the I/O processor
thread be disabled.
As for JBoss, did you know that Hibernate 3.0, the next version of Hibernate,
relies on SLF4J for its logging?
David M. Lloyd wrote:
My point is, as a framework, MINA should work to avoid imposing this
preference upon the consumer of the framework. That's just friendly
programming practice: make as few assumptions as possible about the
user's environment, and impose as few constraints as possible.
On Dec 18, 2007 3:34 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Trustin Lee wrote:
snip/
However, taking
the item #4 into picture, it leads me to think we need a thin built-in
layer for logging that is dedicated to MINA.
Please, don't ! This is MINA, a Network framework, not a
On Dec 18, 2007 3:40 AM, Alex Karasulu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 17, 2007 11:29 AM, Maarten Bosteels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 17, 2007 6:25 AM, Trustin Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
We can ask Log4J team to fix this issue and it will be fixed, but,
again, considering that
Trustin,
If MINA uses it's own logging, and logs critical related messages on a
separate channel, then an application written with MINA yet using another
framework will channel log messages to potentially different targets.
Sometimes you just don't get the best of both worlds. There are trade
Hi Maarten,
On Dec 15, 2007 3:26 AM, Maarten Bosteels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
about (4) : I thought the deadlock is caused by a bug in log4j (namely that
it doesn't use proper synchronization) ?
If that's the case I think we should not try to fix it in MINA.
I think it's not really a bug of
BTW I think we need something different from JarJar
(http://code.google.com/p/jarjar/). We need a simple skeleton code
from which a thin logging layer code is generated into the specified
package (org.apache.mina.common in MINA's case). It could be reused
among many frameworks including MINA.
On Thursday 13 December 2007 18:26:38 Trustin Lee wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007 2:05 AM, Luc Willems [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 13 December 2007 03:50:14 Trustin Lee wrote:
This issue is becoming a real headache even a bottle of tylenol can't
fix, along with the reentrant logging
Hello all,
On Dec 13, 2007 3:50 AM, Trustin Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This issue is becoming a real headache even a bottle of tylenol can't
fix, along with the reentrant logging issue: http://xrl.us/bctaa
I think these two issues should be considered together to resolve the
issues
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 19:26:13 +0100
Maarten Bosteels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
about (1) and (3) : I have (almost) no experience with java.util.logging but
I from the info in this thread I understand that is necessary to set a
system property to use a custom LogManager.
This means two webapps
On Dec 14, 2007 2:05 AM, Luc Willems [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 13 December 2007 03:50:14 Trustin Lee wrote:
This issue is becoming a real headache even a bottle of tylenol can't
fix, along with the reentrant logging issue: http://xrl.us/bctaa
I think these two issues should be
On Thursday 13 December 2007 03:50:14 Trustin Lee wrote:
This issue is becoming a real headache even a bottle of tylenol can't
fix, along with the reentrant logging issue: http://xrl.us/bctaa
I think these two issues should be considered together to resolve the
issues related with logging.
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:50:49 -0800
Brian McCallister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David,
I disagree. If you use jdk logging you require anyone using the
library to also use jdk logging.
What makes you think that?
If you use slf4j (or commons-logging)
you require them put an slf4j
This issue is becoming a real headache even a bottle of tylenol can't
fix, along with the reentrant logging issue: http://xrl.us/bctaa
I think these two issues should be considered together to resolve the
issues related with logging. Let me summarize current situation:
1) There are people (A)
Hello fellow MINA users. I come before you today to hopefully change
your collective minds on an issue that is causing me trouble, and is
preventing two other big projects that I know of from adopting MINA for
I/O.
The issue is, of course, logging. The problem is simple: anyone who
wants to use
the auto-detected logging system as we have here. :^)
Just a thought,
-Scott
-Original Message-
From: David M. Lloyd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 11:06 AM
To: dev@mina.apache.org
Subject: Revisiting logging in MINA 2.0
Hello fellow MINA users. I come before you
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 11:06 AM
To: dev@mina.apache.org
Subject: Revisiting logging in MINA 2.0
Hello fellow MINA users. I come before you today to hopefully change
your collective minds on an issue that is causing me trouble, and is
preventing two other
But why? JDK logging is always available. It's the responsibility of
any good logging framework that has existed since 2001 to install a JDK
LogManager in my opinion.
Do you know of a LogManager that can be used for slf4j? I asked about
one on their mailing list last May. It is a missing
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:25:14 -0800
Cameron Taggart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But why? JDK logging is always available. It's the responsibility of
any good logging framework that has existed since 2001 to install a JDK
LogManager in my opinion.
Do you know of a LogManager that can be
43 matches
Mail list logo
