commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Thomas <>
Subject Re: [DBCP] DBCP2 and logging
Date Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:26:24 GMT
On 24/07/2013 10:02, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> you forget providing CL in container will break app usage...which justify
> the 100 lines of code IMHO

Commons Logging is safe for applications to use in a container
environment unless the container itself is using Commons Logging
directly in which case I'd argue that the container has a bug that needs
to be fixed.

If a container wants to provide DBCP then it is going to have to do
something to protect against conflicts when applications use (a
potentially different) version of DBCP. Whatever mechanism the container
opts for can be used for Commons-Logging as well and the container can
then plug the output of Commons-Logging into its own logging framework.

There are a variety of ways to do this for Commons Logging (for example
JCL over SLF4J) and I would argue it is better for DBCP to use
Commons-Logging for which there is more likely to be a solution
available for a user's logging framework of choice rather than DBCP
inventing yet another facade.


> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <>*
> *Blog: ***<>
> *LinkedIn: ***
> *Github:*
> 2013/7/24 Mark Thomas <>
>> On 24/07/2013 09:36, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> in a bunch of "JavaEE" projects (openejb/tomee, OWB, CXF) we have a
>> facade
>>> in front of the logging to be able to select the framework to use. I know
>>> CL is already a facade but it has the drawback to force a dependency.
>> Maybe
>>> it could be a more adapted approach
>> Writing yet another logging facade to remove a 62KB dependency isn't an
>> itch I want to scratch.
>> Mark
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message