Hello Frank, > > You have three options: > > 1) Stay at log4j (Why change from one of the best logging APIs in an > > application to an facade/wrapper ?) > > Well, you're right... I see two main reasons that would possibly be > taken into account : > > - keep the possiblity to switch implementation in case the final client > already has a logging infrastructure and wants to integrate the > product's logs in it See Ceki's mail... > > - get rid of those multiple (if logger.isDebugEnabled()) tests in my > code with parametrized messages A feature of slf4j or java.util.logging. For your case I would prefer slf4j and use x4juli in the backend. > Would you think these are good reasons, or am I missing some point ? No missing point, well thought.
I do not know the users/adminstrators and the environment of your application. If you are using Ceki's approach (slf4j + log4j in the backend) document well that one is not able to change the underlying log API because of the NDC. Regards Boris _______________________________________________ user mailing list [email protected] http://slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
