Ok, I think I have things under control now by putting my logging dependencies in the profiles section of the poms.
Rob On May 13, 2013, at 4:05 PM, Robert A. Decker wrote: > Hello, > > What I'm trying to do is a bit of a mess. We've written two jars that are > used in a java application and also used in a sling bundle. The java app and > the two jars are using slf4j and slf4j's simple-logger at version 1.7.5 and > uses simple logger's simplelogger.properties to configure itself. > > sling's slf4j's simple-logger version 1.6.4 only supports info, warn, and > error and it doesn't support simplelogger.properties > (http://grepcode.com/file/repo1.maven.org/maven2/org.slf4j/slf4j-simple/1.6.4/org/slf4j/impl/SimpleLogger.java) > > (actually, I just searched through the sling source code and it looks like > slf4j-simple is at version 1.5.2) > > When I include version simple-logger 1.7.5 when I build the two jars, and > include the jars in the bundle I get an error like what's pasted below. I > assume because simple-logger is already bound to slf4j-simple at 1.5.2. > > I may just live with slf4-simple 1.6.4 and not put more effort into this, and > just log things at INFO. Or maybe I can do something in the POM? For example, > is it possible to have different versions of dependencies under different > profiles? I'll put some effort into that now. > > Rob > > > On May 13, 2013, at 3:10 PM, Felix Meschberger wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Am 13.05.2013 um 12:27 schrieb Robert A. Decker: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> The slf4j version coming in through org.apache.sling.commons.log bundle is >>> org.slf4j.impl,version=1.6.4. >> >> Not that I would know of. Sling currently has its own SLF4J API >> implementation. >> >> Plan is to replace that with a plain SLF4J implementation, e.g. Logback. But >> this also requires integration of the configuration support we currently >> have. >> >>> >>> Am I correct in assuming that we can use a newer version of slf4js >>> simple-logger? Or, basically, we can use any logger plugged into sl4j? Or >>> is it possible that simple-logger is coming in from somewhere else? >> >> No, not at this point in time. >> >>> >>> I'm trying to use a newer version but I'm getting class loader problems >>> that appear to be related to simple-logger trying to be bound twice at two >>> different version numbers to slf4j. >> >>> >>> I'm trying to figure out right now where simple-logger is coming from. >> >> What is the actual problem that you want to solve with the upgrade ? >> >> We are not using SLF4J simple-logger, which is just that: "simple" and thus >> not intended for production use (I would assume). >> >> Regards >> Felix >> >> > >
