fluo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From kenneth mcfarland <kennethpmcfarl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Log4J2
Date Wed, 21 Mar 2018 05:28:21 GMT
Thank you for the response. I would love to know why you think Log4J2 would
be good to migrate to (hypothetically) in the future. Your analysis is
always insightful Christopher.



On Mar 20, 2018 10:08 PM, "Christopher" <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:

Like most things, the status quo can be explained by history (momentum) and
initiative (or lack thereof).

Log4j2 debuted its first release (2.0) in 2014. This project began around
2013, and was built on products already using Log4j1 pretty heavily, but
also using dependencies which used SLF4J and logback.

Hadoop was tightly coupled to Log4j1 (at least, prior to version 3... I
haven't checked 3 yet), and other libraries Fluo has used (Twill?) have
been tightly coupled to logback.

Overall, it's very difficult to converge on a single logging framework
across multiple Java libraries. I think there's a strong case for using
Log4j2, but it would take some work to migrate, and address the edge cases
within the libraries Fluo uses/depends on (sometimes this requires doing
less... like not manipulating log levels dynamically or not manipulating
logging during ITs to reduce spamminess).

I would be in favor of migrating to Log4j2, if somebody were interested in
working on that. The migration is probably pretty easy... the tough part is
making sure the class path is set up correctly (just because we switch,
doesn't mean the libraries we use won't still try to log to slf4j or
log4j1).

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:20 PM Kenneth Mcfarland <
kennethmcfarland@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I'm curious why we use our current logging facade over Log4J2. It has a
lot
> of tuning and garbage collecting when used as the backend but also can be
> used as a facade like SLF4J, logback etc.
>
> I've always been sorta baffled why Apache projects don't use Log4J2 it's
> really old. Convenience at that time?
>
> This would be a lot of work but I do have friends there  like Gary Gregory
> if we could consider refactoring to use it. To say again Log4J2 can facade
> to all the popular impls like SLF4J does.
>
> This is something id love to hear opinions on! Thanks guys!!
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message