commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <>
Subject Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j
Date Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:34:58 GMT
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 5:57 AM, Christian Grobmeier <> wrote:
>>> Another option is to try to work with Ceki to address some of the
>>> concerns of the commons community with regards to using slf4j.
>>> * There is a hassle with too many jars for dependencies with slf4j.
>>> * Every time Ceki goes on vacation everything stops.
>>> * Some have a preference for Apache driven projects.
>>> * Figuring out the dependencies that are needed can be difficult.
>> Another option would be to try to convince Ceki to move his project to
>> the ASF?  He is an ASF member, right?  What were his concerns about
>> the ASF that made him start his project elsewhere?
> Ceki is an ASF member and even a Logging PMC.
> You can read most about his concerns on his blog, for example:
> He seems to be very opposed to the ASF model; there was much bad
> feelings in the "log4j case" before I started with logging and
> therefore I doubt that Ceki is willing to go back to the ASF. At least
> his blogposts reflect that he is not satisfied with the "Apache Way"
> itself instead of personal trouble, which we might be able to solve.
> Ceki is reading this list, so maybe he wants to elaborate a bit more.
> The logback project is not satisfying me as a developer. I am at the
> ASF because I like the way it is. I like the software. And of course I
> like the way the work is done here and finally I like the license.
> logback/slf4j is going another way. It does not have the license, and
> holidays seem to be very important to the project.
> We, the ASF, have really good software in our repositories. We have
> very competent people around. Why do we discuss to move to
> slf4j/logback - now? The last time we discussed this there was less
> activity on logging. Now there is activity on the logging project at
> apache. There is Ralph and some other people doing lots of work for
> log4j2.
> We have learned there are some people who want commons-logging. We
> have learned in Tomcat are some people who created classloader
> workarounds and know about the case and could help with it.
> It feels wrong to me to move away to slf4j/logback with Commons at
> this point of time. We would kill the new growing dynamics of logging.
> Instead we should use the new interest and try to work together on the
> new log4j/commons-logging. Over at logging we welcome new fresh blood.
> After all, even log4j 1.2.x is not bad software. I use it daily; i
> have not missed the features of logback (parametrized messages,
> Markers etc.) so far. I put log4j in my class path, copy over one of
> my fave configuration, ready. No need to waste any more time to this.
> log4j is still good and at the moment I don't see a reason to move on.
> In the commons-logging case, if the commons-* projects stop using
> commons-logging, then commons-logging feels pretty dead.
> So my preference is:
> - Help Ralph to make log4j 2.0 become truth
> - Update commons-logging, make it work with log4j 2.0
> - Try to make log4j 2.0 become compatible with slf4j


> If one of you is interested in helping with log4j, please subscribe to


Nice message Christian.


> Cheers
> Christian
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Thank you,

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

View raw message