commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <>
Subject Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j
Date Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:15:12 GMT
One thing that is a hassle to me with modularized projects, even
slf4j, is that you end up with a bunch of tiny jars. IOW & IMO: a
mess. Personally, I want one jar to rule them all. If I want to switch
logging implementer or a client wants another impl I have to fiddle
with my builds and explain what each jar does. It's a hassle.


On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 4:33 AM, Torsten Curdt <> wrote:
> At some stage I started to refactor commons logging into a multi
> module maven project and got rid of the discovery part. So you would
> have the commons-logging-api jar plus exactly one of the
> implementation bridges. So you pick the logging target by putting the
> correct bridge into your classpath. Similar to slf4j.
> Didn't think there is still interest in commons logging. Not sure I
> still have the code. I lost interest after yet another logging
> discussion :) ...but it shouldn't be hard to re-create. Not sure there
> is still enough interest in this.
>>>> Seems to me you should focus on making Log4J the impl
>>>> excellent
> That sounds like work ;)
>> Unfortunately, SLF4J and Logback are run under the BDFL model, not a collaboration
as is done at the ASF.
> Which is one of the reasons I have always been very reluctant to use it.
> cheers,
> Torsten
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Thank you,

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

View raw message