bval-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Logging API
Date Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:49:11 GMT
+1,

we (OpenEJB ;)) are waiting bval and owb and clearly next release can be a
first step before THE release :).

- Romain


2012/3/19 Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>

> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
> <nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > I want to volunteer to do it I have not done anything for BVal since its
> > start.
> >
>
> Great, thanks!
>
> > As per the release of 0.4 I think this would be something we need to put
> it
> > in there. Is there any rough estimate on when we need to cut the 0.4
> > release ?
>
> As far as I know our friends at OpenEJB want to include our next
> release in a new version of TomEE, and may be blocked waiting.  In the
> interest of community I'd like to give it to them ASAP, but I don't
> personally consider the logging issue to be a blocker to 0.4,
> depending on your schedule.
>
> Matt
>
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> wrote:
> >
> >> yup, jul is shitty but better than having 3rd party deps.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org>
> >> > To: "dev@bval.apache.org" <dev@bval.apache.org>
> >> > Cc:
> >> > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 8:46 PM
> >> > Subject: Re: Logging API
> >> >
> >> > +1
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Monday, March 19, 2012, Gerhard Petracek <
> gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>  +1
> >> >>
> >> >>  regards,
> >> >>  gerhard
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>  2012/3/19 Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>
> >> >>
> >> >>>  Apparently the selection of slf4j might not suit everyone.  While
> I am
> >> >>>  comfortable enough with its API (I prefer slf5j), it does cause
us
> to
> >> >>>  impose downstream dependencies on our users that aren't really
> >> >>>  necessary.  As an implementation of an EE specification it would
be
> >> >>>  nice of us to impose dependencies, particularly ones that require
a
> >> >>>  degree of manual intervention like slf4j, on our users only when
> >> >>>  absolutely necessary.  We have 233 .java files in src/main folders,
> >> >>>  only 10 of which contain the String "slf4j" by which I guess
> >> > that we
> >> >>>  are only logging a very small amount of information, in which
case
> we
> >> >>>  might consider ourselves better citizens to simply use jul for
BVal
> >> >>>  regardless of how we may feel about it in the context of
> implementing
> >> >>>  applications.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>  Thoughts?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>  Matt
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Sent from Gmail Mobile
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > - Mohammad Nour
> > ----
> > "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
> moving"
> > - Albert Einstein
>

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