commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Grobmeier <>
Subject Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j
Date Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:01:18 GMT
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 10:33 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.

To be honest, I would love to see this. I like log4j/commons-logging
very much, but there has been decreasing development effort the past
years and slf4j/logback grew strong. Finally I though at least
commons-logging is dead.

I prefer asf libs, and so I would love to see your changes. This
surely would help to revive the loggings project, which already is
resurrecting due to Ralphs efforts with Log4j 2.

So my interest is here, but I am not sure if I have enough time left
to give the support it deserves :-)


>>>> 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:


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

View raw message