Re: SLF4J over Commons Logging
Took way too long at the airport, so punting commit until tomorrow
when I'm awake again.
--jason
On Apr 24, 2008, at 5:18 AM, David Jencks wrote:
+higher than I can count :-)
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 23, 2008, at 1:25 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Yo yo... we've talked about this before, though a while ago... but
IMO its about time we drop Commons Logging like a rock and move
over to SLF4J.
The API is mostly the same, though SLF4J has native support for
things like:
log.trace()
And has additional varargs support for things like:
log.info("this is my foo: {}", foo)
I can dig up the old email I posted hella long ago if needed, but I
think its time to switch over. Its been on the shelf for too long
already IMO. I'm ready to start updating things to use the new
API, but before I do I want to get a general consensus from the
group.
So chime in... failure to chime in means you agree with me :-P
:-)
--jason
Re: SLF4J over Commons Logging
Aight... well, ~9 hours later, I think its working or at 99% I need
to re-add support for the org.apache.geronimo.log.ConsoleLogLevel
property, perhaps even add a special bootstrap SLF4J impl, but I think
that the work is almost ready to commit.
Re-building to see how the testsuite fairs with my latest changes...
and I have to go pick up my mom at the airport, but I hope to get this
committed later tonight :-)
--jason
On Apr 24, 2008, at 5:18 AM, David Jencks wrote:
+higher than I can count :-)
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 23, 2008, at 1:25 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Yo yo... we've talked about this before, though a while ago... but
IMO its about time we drop Commons Logging like a rock and move
over to SLF4J.
The API is mostly the same, though SLF4J has native support for
things like:
log.trace()
And has additional varargs support for things like:
log.info("this is my foo: {}", foo)
I can dig up the old email I posted hella long ago if needed, but I
think its time to switch over. Its been on the shelf for too long
already IMO. I'm ready to start updating things to use the new
API, but before I do I want to get a general consensus from the
group.
So chime in... failure to chime in means you agree with me :-P
:-)
--jason
Re: SLF4J over Commons Logging
Jason Dillon wrote: Yo yo... we've talked about this before, though a while ago... but IMO its about time we drop Commons Logging like a rock and move over to SLF4J. +1 Lots of useful features in SLF4J. It performs well in the cases when you are not logging. -- Thanks, Dan Becker
Re: SLF4J over Commons Logging
And testing now :-)
--jason
On Apr 24, 2008, at 5:18 AM, David Jencks wrote:
+higher than I can count :-)
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 23, 2008, at 1:25 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Yo yo... we've talked about this before, though a while ago... but
IMO its about time we drop Commons Logging like a rock and move
over to SLF4J.
The API is mostly the same, though SLF4J has native support for
things like:
log.trace()
And has additional varargs support for things like:
log.info("this is my foo: {}", foo)
I can dig up the old email I posted hella long ago if needed, but I
think its time to switch over. Its been on the shelf for too long
already IMO. I'm ready to start updating things to use the new
API, but before I do I want to get a general consensus from the
group.
So chime in... failure to chime in means you agree with me :-P
:-)
--jason
Re: SLF4J over Commons Logging
Almost done ;-)
--jason
On Apr 24, 2008, at 5:18 AM, David Jencks wrote:
+higher than I can count :-)
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 23, 2008, at 1:25 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Yo yo... we've talked about this before, though a while ago... but
IMO its about time we drop Commons Logging like a rock and move
over to SLF4J.
The API is mostly the same, though SLF4J has native support for
things like:
log.trace()
And has additional varargs support for things like:
log.info("this is my foo: {}", foo)
I can dig up the old email I posted hella long ago if needed, but I
think its time to switch over. Its been on the shelf for too long
already IMO. I'm ready to start updating things to use the new
API, but before I do I want to get a general consensus from the
group.
So chime in... failure to chime in means you agree with me :-P
:-)
--jason
Re: SLF4J over Commons Logging
+higher than I can count :-)
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 23, 2008, at 1:25 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Yo yo... we've talked about this before, though a while ago... but
IMO its about time we drop Commons Logging like a rock and move over
to SLF4J.
The API is mostly the same, though SLF4J has native support for
things like:
log.trace()
And has additional varargs support for things like:
log.info("this is my foo: {}", foo)
I can dig up the old email I posted hella long ago if needed, but I
think its time to switch over. Its been on the shelf for too long
already IMO. I'm ready to start updating things to use the new API,
but before I do I want to get a general consensus from the group.
So chime in... failure to chime in means you agree with me :-P
:-)
--jason
Re: SLF4J over Commons Logging
+1
-Donald
Jason Dillon wrote:
Yo yo... we've talked about this before, though a while ago... but IMO
its about time we drop Commons Logging like a rock and move over to SLF4J.
The API is mostly the same, though SLF4J has native support for things
like:
log.trace()
And has additional varargs support for things like:
log.info("this is my foo: {}", foo)
I can dig up the old email I posted hella long ago if needed, but I
think its time to switch over. Its been on the shelf for too long
already IMO. I'm ready to start updating things to use the new API, but
before I do I want to get a general consensus from the group.
So chime in... failure to chime in means you agree with me :-P
:-)
--jason
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
SLF4J over Commons Logging
Yo yo... we've talked about this before, though a while ago... but IMO
its about time we drop Commons Logging like a rock and move over to
SLF4J.
The API is mostly the same, though SLF4J has native support for things
like:
log.trace()
And has additional varargs support for things like:
log.info("this is my foo: {}", foo)
I can dig up the old email I posted hella long ago if needed, but I
think its time to switch over. Its been on the shelf for too long
already IMO. I'm ready to start updating things to use the new API,
but before I do I want to get a general consensus from the group.
So chime in... failure to chime in means you agree with me :-P
:-)
--jason
