aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Schmitz <>
Subject Re: Aries JNDI dependencies
Date Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:54:25 GMT
Hi David,

I also agree with Mark that it is a loss not having SLF4J anymore.
As slf4j is facade one can make a choice which logging framework to use 
behind it.
What are the pros of having your own logging backend?
I don't like handcrafting stuff which already exists with less 
If have a look at other enterprise projects SLF4J is kind of defacto 
I would very much appreciate to have SLF4J again.

If that is should be no option for you then what about at least 
providing an optional dependency to SLF4J with a mechanism to switch 
between your log service and slf4j?

> Hi Mark,
> Hmmm, I have to say that I don't really like message like: 'please
> revert your changes because our product does x, y or z'. Apache Aries
> is an opensource community that provides components that are used in
> more than one product, not only yours.
> I would prefer a more constructive approach where we can weigh the
> pros and cons of the various approaches.
> * SLF4J brings in dependencies that not everybody may want. In our
> use-case in JBoss the SLF4J dep brings in at least 2 additional
> bundles, which is unnecessary as we already have our own logging
> system.
> * SLF4J may have been decided on in Feb 2010, but a vibrant project
> must show its agility to work in a number a settings. It's a good
> thing that Aries is now used in more and more settings, but this
> brings with it the notion of being able to accommodate.
> So... I'm not entirely sure what the actual problem is with the
> LogService, you mention:
> * logging against specific classes
> * other behavioural changes (what are they?)
> Instead of simply going back to SLF4J, I would like to have a discussion about:
> * possible alternatives, can we maybe change how the LogService is
> used to accommodate your needs?
> * or we could look at other logging alternatives, java.util.logging
> comes to mind, since that can be configured to go to anything you like
> as well and has the advantage over SLF4J in that the dependencies are
> part of the JDK...
> Best regards,
> David
> On 31 January 2012 09:56, Mark Nuttall<>  wrote:
>> Hi David,
>> We've started running into what are for us serious consequences of your
>> recent changes to JNDI. I'm sorry that it's taken us a few weeks to notice
>> this. When JNDI logged via the SLF4J API, we had a pluggable logging API
>> that allowed us to log to our product's standard infrastructure. In
>> removing SLF4J, your changes appear to have bound us
>> to org.osgi.service.log.LogService, which we do not want, removed important
>> logging capabilities, such as the ability to log against specific classes,
>> and made other unwanted bahevioural changes. This is a problematic
>> regression for us. Please can you revert JNDI to logging via the SLF4J API?
>> SLF4J has been the Apache Aries standard for logging since the "[DISCUSS]
>> Logging framework" thread in February 2010. Thank you very much in advance.
>> Regards,
>> Mark
>> On 17 January 2012 11:38, David Bosschaert<>wrote:
>>> On 16 January 2012 15:54, David Bosschaert<>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I'll look at changing the SLF4J dependency to an OSGi Log Service
>>>> dependency next...
>>> That's done now too: see revision 1232390
>>> Hope this is ok with everyone...
>>> Best regards,
>>> David

View raw message