struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Pratt <thechrispr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Less boilerplate in code
Date Thu, 22 May 2014 07:19:20 GMT
You are correct, it delegates the actual logging to a logging engine,
currently either Log4j, Logback, java.util.logging or to SLF4j.
  (*Chris*)


On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Lukasz Lenart <lukaszlenart@apache.org>wrote:

> @Chris
> Do I get it right - Onyx is just logging facade not the full-blow
> logging library?
>
> 2014-05-17 8:52 GMT+02:00 Lukasz Lenart <lukaszlenart@apache.org>:
> > Some were already addressed, another thing is that across the
> > framework we are using different semantic inside logging messages, ie:
> > "Value [#0] was excluded by pattern [#1]" and re-writing all these
> > doesn't make sense. Right now XWork logging facade is very thin - one
> > class implementing Logger interface and another implementing
> > LoggerFactory - the rest is delegated to given logging library.
> >
> > Besides that, users don't care what kind of logging library framework
> > is using - till it doesn't interfere with the one used in their apps
> > or clashes with logging layers from other frameworks. Switching
> > entirely to SLF4j can break few apps and we'll get a lot of complains
> > why (not the first time ;-)
> >
> > My plan looks like this:
> > - add checking if given log level is enabled inside logging methods
> > - start migrating code to the new semantic (removing if
> (LOG.isXxxEnabled())
> > - migrate the rest of logging calls to use parameter substitution
> > - (or start with this before previous step) use Onyx instead of
> > current LoggerUtils
> > - change order of discovering logging libs on the classpath and put
> SLF4j on top
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > --
> > Łukasz
> > + 48 606 323 122 http://www.lenart.org.pl/
> >
> > 2014-05-15 23:14 GMT+02:00 Chris Pratt <thechrispratt@gmail.com>:
> >> What is your reluctance to using SLF4j.  It seems like the right
> technology
> >> for the problem.
> >>   (*Chris*)
> >>
> >> P.S.  ICLA on the way
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:16 PM, Lukasz Lenart <
> lukaszlenart@apache.org>wrote:
> >>
> >>> 2014-05-14 21:51 GMT+02:00 Chris Pratt <thechrispratt@gmail.com>:
> >>> > Yes, we could use Onyx's interface mechanism, but I think SLF4j's is
> >>> > probably more stable and definitely more supported.  So I'd probably
> >>> > recommend that we extract the SLF4j support object and use it
> directly
> >>> (or
> >>> > at least make it the default).  If it's something that you're
> interested
> >>> > in, I'd have to fill out the forms to become a committer on Struts.
> >>>  Where
> >>> > would I find that information?
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure if this the right move, switching to SLF4j over our
> >>> custom solution. Please can we explore this topic a bit?
> >>>
> >>> The first step to become a committer is to fill ICLA
> >>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> --
> >>> Łukasz
> >>> + 48 606 323 122 http://www.lenart.org.pl/
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>

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