incubator-jspwiki-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ceki Gulcu (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (JSPWIKI-376) Move from log4j to slf4j
Date Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:24:44 GMT


Ceki Gulcu commented on JSPWIKI-376:

> Actually, there is a good need for a custom Logger implementation even
> with j.u.l - varargs (java.util.logging does not work with
> varargs). Stripes does this.

SLF4J has support for parameterized logging statements which might be
what you are looking for.

> Another problem with j.u.l is that a single configuration file
> controls all logging. So if you have multiple jspwiki instances, you
> can't control logging per application.

This control problem applies to j.u.l. but no other logging library,
including jcl, slf4j and log4j.

> Your arguments are convincing me even more that we should write our
> own facade...

It's a wonderful free world. :-)

The downside of your own facade, is (slight) isolation from the rest of the
community. Developers will have a (slightly) harder time understanding JSPWiki
and getting into it. It is sometimes beneficial to raise the entry
barrier although logging may not be the best place to do so.

Anyway, logging is a controversial topic. I can only hope that the
JSPWiki community will reach a consensus without wasting too much

> Move from log4j to slf4j
> ------------------------
>                 Key: JSPWIKI-376
>                 URL:
>             Project: JSPWiki
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Core & storage
>            Reporter: Janne Jalkanen
>            Assignee: Harry Metske
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 3.0
> SLF4J allows far more flexible logging than log4j, and it would allow us to get rid of
these dumb log4j compatibility problems that sometimes occur.  It also plays better with other
applications, gives the user more power to choose how to log his stuff, and is also pretty
cool otherwise. The change would be relatively trivial, and would probably be largely invisible
to the users (since we could continue shipping with necessary log4j jars).
> The license is MIT/X11, so that's fine.
> Opinions?

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message