axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tom Jordahl" <tjord...@adobe.com>
Subject RE: Problems with commons-logging - Very interesting
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2006 23:00:23 GMT
Hi Robert,

 

Thanks for your comments.

 

I would not go so far as to say I prefer SLF4J.  I was just raising the
possibility that Axis 1.x might consider it.  You are absolutely correct
in saying that if compatibility was adversely affected, then waiting is
the right thing to do.

 

I will also note that JRun (the Macromedia/Adobe J2EE server) OEMs Axis
and uses commons-logging to very smoothly tie Axis logging to the JRun
specific logging classes.  Switching that would probably break that
system. :-(

 

So waiting for CL 1.1 is a reasonable course of action.

-- 
Tom Jordahl 
Adobe ColdFusion Team 

________________________________

From: robert burrell donkin [mailto:robertburrelldonkin@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:17 AM
To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Problems with commons-logging - Very interesting

 

On 12/19/05, Tom Jordahl <tjordahl@adobe.com> wrote:

	One of my developers found this very interesting paper on the
problems
	using commons-logging (like Axis 1.x does) while trying to
upgrade
	ColdFusion's log4j implementation from 1.1 to 1.2.
	
	   http://www.qos.ch/logging/classloader.jsp
<http://www.qos.ch/logging/classloader.jsp> 


a few points i'd like to make:

1 IIRC all the factual errors in earlier versions have been correctly
but IMO there are a (small) number of opinions which may be misleading
to those without a deep understanding of classloaders. 

2 though Ceki made some important points and his article definitely
contributed to a more analytic approach to the known issues with JCL,
some points are a little unfair since it is possible to set up similar
scenarios for the compilation-time static-binding approach used by
SLF4J.

3 all the problems which can be fixed (within the limitations that the
various specifications impose on any logging bridge that uses dynamic
binding) are believed to be fixed in the upcoming 1.1 release.

	 

	We might want to consider converting Axis 1.x to use the SLF4J:
	   http://www.slf4j.org/ <http://www.slf4j.org/> 
	
	We encountered several of the problems mentioned in the paper
	specifically because Axis uses commons-logging instead of log4j
	directly.


be aware that there is a degree of trade off here. the problems which
JCL has with classloaders are a direct result of the mess made of the
various Java specifications related to classloaders. SLF4J isn't as
widely used as JCL and is still under development. the original JCL code
was created by a team contained developers who were (at the time) as
knowledgable as any about the relevant specifications and about
classloading but the code even they produced didn't stand the test of
time. ceki's team are also good but their approach (though promising)
hasn't been analysed in great detail and it's possible that early
adopters may suffer.

IMHO if shifting to SLF4J would break backwards compatibility (in axis)
then I'd recommend waiting for a little while (for SLF4J to be released
and for JCL 1.1). 

If Tom prefers SLF4J then a JCL-SLF4J static bridge may be the answer. 

- robert


Mime
View raw message