geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <>
Subject Re: [BUILD] Trunk: Failed for Revision: 570882
Date Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:02:29 GMT

On Aug 30, 2007, at 8:48 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:

> On Aug 30, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>> On Aug 29, 2007, at 10:11 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>>> You are very correct... :-)
>>> IMO slf4j is the way to go... drop JCL like a rock...
>> Logback is LGPL, to be precise -- not that it makes any difference...
> The docs for logback actually appear to suggest that developers use  
> slf4j anyways, and only use logback for the back-end processing muck.
>> I haven't looked at sl4j. What are the motivations to switch?
> It core jar dependency is smaller.
> Its API includes support for context (Markers and MDC stuff).
> Parameterized logging support... so instead of:
>     if (log.isDebugEnabled()) {
>         log.debug("This is some important thingy: " + thingy);
>     }
> You can simply:
>     log.debug("This is some important thingy: {}", thingy);


> It does not suffer from classloader crapo like JCL... as you might  
> know, JCL is very picky about CL muck, and if you happen to have  
> more than one JCL jar on the CP (which can happen from time to  
> time) it becomes very, very unpredictable.  Nor does it eat memory  
> like JCL.

Heh. Was hoping this would be the case...

> Its also got some adapters to allow code that currently uses JCL or  
> log4j to get piped into slf4j so that everything can get tunneled  
> through the same logging mechanism very easily.
> IMO, this is the way to go...  Not a huge change either, mostly a  
> global search replace on a few things, but we also need to do other  
> clean up of logging too, which would be ideal to do around the same  
> time.

Agreed. IMO, improving our logging is one of the biggest improvements  
we could make to G...

Thanks for the info!


View raw message