Mailing-List: contact users-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@directory.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of elecharny@gmail.com designates
 64.233.182.188 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=Apz4VGEcyvLJ2D4cT25VvU6xgaWaxnjZnnqjK3BHgQ51HmF53iRcSjaPp6cv8LvjbJYbN2psWoc/o1eIxAFQthWLEw+X28A9dS313DwzttkSmwL90LUDE+a35o5kIHbGxU9wr/xh722TxODdalAvxjsMFkGoh9bQpn7vuNkIHF0=
Message-ID: <d45b08f00703201247h7e65b774rbf9538eeb30baccf@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 20:47:33 +0100
From: "Emmanuel Lecharny" <elecharny@gmail.com>
Reply-To: elecharny@iktek.com
To: users@directory.apache.org
Subject: Re: Integration test with Apache Directory server
In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.0.20070320201914.03d6f358@mail.qos.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_161011_17095928.1174420053409"
References: <6.0.0.22.0.20070320201914.03d6f358@mail.qos.ch>

------=_Part_161011_17095928.1174420053409
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Thanks Ceki,

when I read Justen's mail, I went to the logback site to see if it was an
option to migrate from what we use to this new lib. Sadly, I didn't had tim=
e
to dig seriously the pros and cons of doing it.

We will need to think about it, as logback has evolved a lot since the last
time I checked it (end of last year ?). May be we will need to have a convo
with you about the advantage of migrating, and more important, the impact o=
n
our code base and on our users.

Atm, we are trying to cut two releases, but as soon as we are done, then we
will be able to reconsider the whole log problem.

Thanks !

On 3/20/07, Ceki G=FClc=FC <ceki@qos.ch> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Justen,
>
> > Avoid using 'odd' libraries like nlog4j, from what I can see after
> > trying to resolve these issues through Google, the API is not likely
> > to just spin it's wheels only having boutique integrations. The easier
> > something is to integrate the more likely it is to be used. A perfect
> > example of this is how unit test can be integrated with JUnit and I
> > will no longer need and external OpenLDAP server.
>
> I am sorry to hear that you are had trouble using nlog4j. Nlog4j has
> been superceded by logback, which like nlog4j, implements the SLF4J
> interface natively. Thus, it is very easy to switch from nlog4j
> (assuming you were using the SLF4J interface) to logback, log4j12 or
> JDK14 logging.
>
> Starting with SLF4J 1.3, depending on SLF4J means depending on
> slf4j-api without any implementation imposed on the end user.
>
> Here is a quote from the release notes:
>
>   Release 1.3.0 consists of rearrangement of classes among
>   projects. More specifically, the org.slf4j.LoggerFactory class is now
>   packaged within the slf4j-api.jar file instead of the various slf4j
>   bindings. It follows that client code needs to depend on only
>   slf4j-api in order to compile, while the various slf4j bindings are
>   only needed as runtime dependencies. See also the Maven2-related FAQ [1=
]
>   entry. Given the practical significance of this change, we highly
>   recommend that library-authors upgrade to version 1.3.0 at their
>   earliest convenience.
>
> Thus, I would suggest that Apache DS upgrade to SLF4J 1.3.0 so as to
> offer more liberty and comfort to your end-users.
>
> I hope this helps,
>
> [1] http://www.slf4j.org/faq.html#maven2
>
>
> -- Ceki G=FClc=FC
> Logback: The reliable, generic, fast and flexible logging framework for
> Java.
> http://logback.qos.ch
>
>


--=20
Cordialement,
Emmanuel L=E9charny
www.iktek.com

------=_Part_161011_17095928.1174420053409--