commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <>
Subject Re: [JCS] update to Log4j 2 facade API
Date Tue, 05 Sep 2017 15:34:51 GMT

> On Sep 5, 2017, at 6:45 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <> wrote:
> 2017-09-05 15:33 GMT+02:00 Ralph Goers <>:
>> I see your point. I guess we never built a bridge from the Log4j 2 API to
>> JUL simply because we couldn’t imagine anyone would want to use it :-) As I
>> said, by choosing jul you have gone with the worst option. You would have
>> been better off creating your own API.
>> I think you will see in my original email I said that containers are a
>> special case - either they should hide all the third party dependencies
>> they use or they should use their own logging abstraction. It sounds like
>> TomEE doesn’t do either of these.
> It is more complicated, tomee does for the code it owns, as well as cxf,
> owb, .... but the most consistent API is JUL for all of them (most of them
> even just subclass JUL to allow extension). It looks doable to be fast with
> JUL since you can override Logger completely so I'm tempted to say that in
> term of API not that impacting until you use very advanced signature (which
> is not the case of container stacks in general).
>> If you need an adapter from the Log4j 2 API to a TomEE implementation just
>> create a Jira issue at Log4j 2. I am sure we would be happy to provide it.
> I think it must go the other way: log4j2 must push projects to move
> otherwise projects will be happy with X -> log4j2 bridges, no?

We already have support for bridging other APIs to Log4j 2.


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

View raw message