Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 572C8200CFA for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 20:20:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 559BA1609E8; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 18:20:59 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 74EAF1609E2 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 20:20:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 61912 invoked by uid 500); 5 Sep 2017 18:20:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 61900 invoked by uid 99); 5 Sep 2017 18:20:56 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 18:20:55 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 7D432182F18 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 18:20:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.38 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.38 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GdCcDc7Z89cq for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 18:20:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-f181.google.com (mail-yw0-f181.google.com [209.85.161.181]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 7B27A5F5FD for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 18:20:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-f181.google.com with SMTP id s62so20117ywg.0 for ; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 11:20:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=rMWcjjXEDXt2LtsQOjW2f8qyV5/peZqhJ1ZNUAQnoLM=; b=dTb+IpMmiG80qlH7vATI3vdvI1sM7yUdlUcryrpl96u26N48BkkwXZg47yDCb3rHCk p0/hp6ssacx2MVLGG2zIzm/AkvHFw3i+kVDsFYSZn4tcbY9bZ77zZt8y/2faO+P+/fOx ihmcR2LFkAMSK7vE9N6g7guwYmOLVxN+2LWhKFj6dfhUOcVyJGBVnseDlqOd3Z0BP5/I rfhWzSqrKFt5zALko4TlC0TiAkivAhfeoxDFsHksi01rSbJdnnoEe3D9FcDsRnrm1m1q vodPhQxVTzpGrzSpn93TVVjv8jYJjtD+4W6vKKeYej5wIKUyn9/quysyvloTNoR3dsyn RlHw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=rMWcjjXEDXt2LtsQOjW2f8qyV5/peZqhJ1ZNUAQnoLM=; b=h53wWGC3Iav7iW5ng4uCOmMx1FHLN1SFfxFmIAzJedWQNnssXb9iq9nm6GOiR15Fb6 KzKuXigl9AjLZeEPqJl8QZIaimTfUjTN35Ggk/a5Tuuyjk8Qa5XHP910lZbE6UxCHaJm 1vPnjwLYIlCQJkxqIKclZPM8NqC4+EnXqSGMN9Hp3Po7UpemYLyULLjN45BvmJnnKFf9 EOvsPuTzCzO5MtsseVWF4BSCx4KoNIUXElK82aLXDYDzV6NbMGuaRF9l+gM6u7ZvNiAm 5tNmG6Ho32pBNFLek4EtP+PJi42pd1WnLmJVVx9ydyBtUdE6QjVavSWLRhEIBkdag9a7 joig== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUgeWS1Ke1Uy2u9WpqMrrYqZFqGbkePBlQY4mUf9Mn1cWDcT4QDN r0wsmrH04A+1bcthUa7mOsQuWzM0Jw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb4fMhsQ6Ed/vMlXPlTmhKIVhw9yzNASsbZUdr6rQUmREctx46+lmKrPh9PY8IG/GvDAmPOoo5/Xnkzu1SP6X2s= X-Received: by 10.37.204.22 with SMTP id l22mr4116738ybf.255.1504635648054; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 11:20:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.37.105.143 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 11:20:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <59AC434A.2090208@apache.org> <59AC46EF.4040209@apache.org> <87736653-3D81-4CCE-A32B-72A17ABD5EC4@dslextreme.com> <5F1B7C40-AE2C-4534-A1CC-337374EFDDD4@dslextreme.com> <0693A48E-8D60-410D-ACF2-6066B2EE77BE@dslextreme.com> From: Romain Manni-Bucau Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 20:20:27 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [JCS] update to Log4j 2 facade API To: Commons Developers List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0867b6519d0305587549be" archived-at: Tue, 05 Sep 2017 18:20:59 -0000 --94eb2c0867b6519d0305587549be Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable @Ralph: not exactly, if you check tomee/meecowave/cxf, all have Logger implementations backed by something else. Integration is more or less good depending the requirements but extending logger you get an implementation almost as fast as a native log4j. It keeps JUL as API which also allows a dependency free solution. Only constraint is to create the jul Logger through a framework factory if you don't want to depend on the LogManager which is sadly set only on the JVM. The integration (Log4j2Logger) could be owned by log4j2 (i assume it is in jul integration maybe?). It is better than a handler since it bypasses jul completely when switching and goes on the impl directly. Summary is "jul is bad" doesnt mean dont use jul since you can make it good and stay dependency free for frameworks which is quite important for not final dependencies (=3D you dont know if the app is used = in a final app or as a library in a stack). Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory 2017-09-05 20:13 GMT+02:00 Gary Gregory : > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Ralph Goers > wrote: > > > > > > On Sep 5, 2017, at 9:19 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau > > wrote: > > > > > > Le 5 sept. 2017 17:35, "Ralph Goers" > > a =C3=A9crit : > > > > > > > > >> On Sep 5, 2017, at 6:45 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau > > > > wrote: > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >> 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. > > > > > > > > > Not bypassing jul impl without a logmanager right? That is what does > > > frameworks api > > > > Is what you are asking for the same as what is asked for in > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2025? < > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2025?> If so, I am plannin= g > > on doing that although that integration will not make users very happy. > > This is one of the reasons that jul sucks. > > > > Ralph, > > Do you want to assign that issue to yourself? That would allow others to > focus on different tickets. > > Gary > > > > > > Ralph > --94eb2c0867b6519d0305587549be--