commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <>
Subject Re: [Configuration] experimental branch uses java.util.logging?
Date Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:58:21 GMT

On Apr 10, 2009, at 11:40 AM, Oliver Heger wrote:

> Ralph Goers schrieb:
>> I just noticed that this was changed from commons.logging.  I'm  
>> very strongly opposed to using j.u.l. I much prefer a logging  
>> abstraction. While I'm not in love with commons-logging and would  
>> prefer SLF4J, using commons-logging is better than using j.u.l  
>> directly. As I said, if there is some reason for moving away from  
>> commons-logging I'd be happy to do the work to migrate to SLF4J.
>> Ralph
> This change was made by Emmanuel, IIRC for the reason of getting rid  
> of a dependency. Personally I was not too happy with this change  
> either. IMHO libraries should use logging facades rather than  
> forcing applications to use specific logging tools. So we seem to  
> agree in this point.
> About the abstraction to use I am a bit indifferent. There is this  
> point of eating our own dog food (i.e. commons-logging). But if you  
> prefer SLF4J (I haven't used it myself), I am not opposed to moving  
> to it.

Glad to hear that we are on the same page.

If we continue to use commons-logging I would want to add a bunch of  
enhancements to it that SLF4J already has. I suspect that this would  
require a new branch of commons logging and I'd probably want the  
minimum version to be Java 5. Since I'm only one guy and stretched  
very thin I'm not sure when I could get to that. But I really would  
like to.


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

View raw message