commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Kitching <>
Subject Re: [logging] SLF4J?
Date Fri, 10 Mar 2006 05:45:55 GMT
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 00:17 -0500, Sandy McArthur wrote:
> On 3/9/06, James Carman <> wrote:
> > So, have we missed the boat?
> >
> >
> >
> > Is SLF4J going to take over?  I do like the fact that it relies on the user
> > dropping the correct jar file in the classpath to choose the implementation
> > (sounds familiar).
> I think 1.4 j.u.logging is going to take over eventually. As time
> passes people care less and less about older JVMs. The fact that j.u.l
> already available to the programmer without any extra effort and not
> an external dependency means a lot to people who don't prioritize
> their passions as: their god, their country, their logging api, and
> then their family. That said, inertia will keep clogging and log4j
> around for a good while.

There are good reasons to continue work on JCL regardless of the
existence of SLF4J, in particular the fact that there is a large volume
of code using the JCL API, but having problems with the current JCL

What logging library people choose for their projects is then their
business as far as I am concerned. A "market share" is something
commercial operators need to worry about; all we need to concern
ourselves with is creating good code. JCL1.0.x has flaws but has
generally been a success. JCL1.1 is expected to fix a significant number
of those flaws. Ideas are being considered for a JCL2.x to fix the rest.

I also agree that j.u.logging will eventually be the standard API. It's
not a great design IMO but the fact that it's in the language core
counts for a lot. However that's likely to be at least 3 years in the
future even for container-like apps, and maybe 10 years for *all* uses
of java < 1.4 to disappear (esp. embedded systems).

For standalone applications, SLF4J is a fine solution. For use in
containers, I have some significant concerns about SLF4J. I may be wrong
but we'll soon see I guess (assuming SLF4J actually starts to get a
fraction of the use that JCL currently has). I believe that JCL 1.1 will
be pretty good for containers, and JCL2 even better.

But in the end, JCL will continue to improve as will SLF4J I expect, and
people can choose as they wish - until j.u.logging knocks both libs into
the dustbin of history.



To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message