commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS][POOL] Logging options for Pool2
Date Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:22:36 GMT
On Feb 10, 2012, at 15:08, Ralph Goers <> wrote:

> On Feb 10, 2012, at 7:02 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>> Yeah, that isn't going to work. I really do wish java.util.logging had
>> been designed with JavaEE in mind. Clearly it wasn't. We tried fixing
>> this in Tomcat but even with JULI the APIs just aren't available to do
>> this. You could do JVM specific hacks but they will break just as soon
>> as the JVM vendor changes their internal API (as they are perfectly
>> entitled to do). In the end, Tomcat categorized this problem as WONTFIX.
> Sorry, JUL wasn't designed with anything in mind as far as I can tell.  It sucks as a
facade and the implementation is barely adequate.  I've delayed creating the bridge from JUL
to Log4j 2 primarily because all the ways to do it are bad.
>> With this in mind, commons-logging is a better choice as it should be
>> possible to have an entirely contained logging setup within the
>> application and a properly written container shouldn't interfere with
>> this. Commons-logging is also relatively simple to redirect to something
>> else.
> That is the primary reason to use Commons Logging, IMO. Unfortunately, the API is pretty

Let's make it better then. Pool2 can drive the requirements and we'll
eat our own dog food.

>> Given the discussion so far has been around commons-logging or
>> java.util.logging, I think these two are the front runners. I can live
>> with either but I have a very narrow focus - i.e. what can i get working
>> easily with Tomcat's packaged renamed version of pool2.
> I'm not sure why you'd rule out SLF4J. Although it isn't perfect, as a facade it works
pretty well.
>> Taking a wider view, commons-logging is probably the better choice as
>> although it adds a dependency, it is easier for folks to integrate with
>> their logging framework of choice.
> Yes, it is a much better choice than JUL just because of that.
> Ralph
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message