+1 from me as well
On 06/24/2009 12:59 PM, Carlton K Mason wrote:
Hi Jason,
I'm not familiar with SLF4J but, I do see that it is a facade that can be
bound to java.util.logging (as well as other loggers) which is nice. Many
of the other projects that we work on already use java.util.logging so
having that flexibility to use it in Wink through the SLF4F facade sounds
good.
I see it also has a MIT like license which is also a big plus.
+1
Carlton
From:
Jason Dillon<[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
Date:
06/24/2009 10:48 AM
Subject:
Commons-logging -> SLF4J
Sent by:
Jason Dillon<[email protected]>
I would like to move the logging framework from Commons-logging to
SLF4J.
SLF4J has less classloading wrinkles than JCL and has a smaller foot
print, while providing more logging features, most significantly its
fast parser for "{}" replacement which makes the need for most if
(log.isDebugEnabled()) {} blocks uneeded.
If there are no objections I would like to provide a patch to move
from JCL to SLF4J.
--jason
