lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <>
Subject Re: Java logging in Lucene
Date Fri, 05 Dec 2008 21:00:07 GMT
Shai Erera wrote:
> Perhaps instead of introducing Java logging then (if you're too against 
> it), we could introdue a static InfoStream class, with a static 
> message() and isVerbose() methods.

It's tempting to add our own logging API, as you suggest, but I fear 
that would re-invent what so many have re-invented before.

> As for the logging framework, I'd think that Java logging creates no
> dependencies for Lucene. java.util.logging exists at least since 1.4.
> So it's already in the JDK.

Good point.  Java's built-in logging would not add a dependency, but it 
can still conflict.  But in other projects with serious logging needs 
where I've tried using Java's built in logging, but we've always ended 
up switching to log4j.  So I worry that choosing Java's logging might 
not help those who need logging, and it would conflict with those who 
already use log4j.

> You might argue that some applications
> who embed a search component over Lucene use a different logging
> system (such as Log4j), but in that case I think it'd be fair to say
> that Java logging is what Lucene uses.

What do we tell folks who currently use both log4j and Lucene?  How 
would they benefit from this?

A meta-logger like SLF4J seems preferable, since it could integrate with 
whatever logging system folks already use.  Adding this would be an 
incompatible change, since folks would need to add new jars into their 
applications besides the lucene jar.  But that's perhaps not a huge 
burden.  What do others think?


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message