manifoldcf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Karl Wright <daddy...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Log Framework Zoo
Date Tue, 05 Mar 2019 13:55:38 GMT
Two years ago I moved the standard logger for all of ManifoldCF to log4j
2.  This was a non-backwards-compatible change but it was forced on us
because our downstream connector dependencies started to require it.

However, there are still log4j 1.2 dependencies we cannot get rid of due to
other packages (like Jetty and Zookeeper) that haven't yet upgraded.  So
they all have to coexist together.

It was a major chunk of work getting everything to run after this was
done.  I would suggest being *very* careful about removing dependencies
even if you think they're not doing anything.

Thanks,
Karl



On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 8:43 AM Markus Schuch <markus.schuch@deutschebahn.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> currently we have
>
>
>   *   log4j-1.2.17.jar (Log4j 1 API & Impl)
>   *   log4j-1.2-api-2.4.1.jar (Log4j 1 API to Log4j 2 Adapter)
>   *   log4j-api-2.4.1.jar (Log4j 2 API)
>   *   log4j-core-2.4.1.jar (Log4j 2 Impl)
>   *   commons-logging-1.2.jar (Commons Logging API)
>   *   jcl-over-slf4j-1.7.25.jar (Replacement for Commons Logging with
> SLF4j in the stomach)
>   *   slf4j-api-1.7.25.jar (SLF4J API)
>   *   slf4j-simple-1.7.25.jar (Simple SLF4J Impl)
>
>
> on our Classpath.
>
> I see the following problems:
>
>   *   Having both log4j-1.2.x.jar and log4j-1.2-api-2.x.jar is kind of
> classloader roulette since both JARs contain the log4j 1.2 API packages and
> classes with different implementation
>   *   The same goes for commons-logging and jcl-over-slf4j
>   *   Log statements from SLF4J are logged with a different logger, that
> everything else
>
> I would suggest to (without having tried to compile it)
>
>   *   remove log4j-1.2.17.jar
>   *   remove commons-logging-1.2.jar
>   *   remove slf4j-simple-1.7.25.jar
>   *   add log4j-slf4j-impl-2.4.1.jar (as replacement for slf4j-simple)
>
> But may be there are other historic reasons for having all those JARs
> around.
>
> Has somebody more insights on that?
>
> Many thanks in advance,
> Markus
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Pflichtangaben anzeigen<
> http://www.deutschebahn.com/pflichtangaben/20190304>
>
> N?here Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im DB-Konzern finden Sie hier:
> http://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz
>

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