You are always welcome to use any Apache Software Foundation source
under the terms of the license. It's best if you just read the license
yourself, I think that you will find it entirely friendly to your
needs here.


On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Angelo zerr <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Benson and Daniel
>
> Many thanks to have token your time to explain your choice to use
> java.util.logging.Logger.
> I like the idea to have not a lot of dependencies and perhaps we will do
> like you.
>
> If we decided to do that, is it possible to copy/paste your code about
> Logging in our project XDocReport which is MIT License?
>
> Thank a lot again.
>
> Regards Angelo
>
> 2011/8/3 Daniel Kulp <[email protected]>
>
>> On Wednesday, August 03, 2011 12:03:45 AM Angelo zerr wrote:
>> > Hi CXF Team,
>> >
>> > I would like know why you have decided to use java.util.logging.Logger in
>> > your code and implements it with SFL4J, commons-logging...instead of
>> using
>> > directly for instance SFL4J which very used in a lot of open source
>> project.
>> > I like this idea not to be dependant of any Logger JARs, and I tell me if
>> > we will use this idea for our XDocReport project. Have you some
>> limitation
>> > to use java.util.logging.Logger instead of using directly SFL4J?
>>
>> Way back when we started writing the first lines of CXF, SLF4J wasn't
>> really
>> an option, it didn't exist yet.  :-)    Thus, the choices really were
>> commons-
>> logging (which sucked, still does), j.u.l.Logger, or Log4J directly.   We
>> ended up just using j.u.l as it performed the best and the API's were
>> relatively clean and straight forward.   A simple wrapper allowed using
>> Log4J
>> as well.
>>
>> As Benson mentioned, neither commons-logging and SLF4J support localized
>> log
>> messages as part of the logger itself.   Before calling the logger, you
>> would
>> need to localize things and thus, you get a lot more
>> if (logger.isLogging(..)) {
>>    String msg = ....use ResourceBundle or something.....
>>    logger.log(..., msg)
>> }
>> which makes the code a lot crappier than just:
>> logger.log(level, "MSG_KEY", params)
>>
>> The extra dependencies issue was also a concern.   At the time, Apache
>> Harmony
>> was beginning to ramp up and we wanted CXF to be the JAX-WS implementation
>> they would use.   They didn't want any extra jars if they were not really
>> needed so using j.u.l was a better option there.    Other projects also
>> kind
>> of appreciate having fewer deps.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Thank a lot for your answer.
>> >
>> > Regards Angelo
>> --
>> Daniel Kulp
>> [email protected]
>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>

Reply via email to