logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mikael Ståldal <mikael.stal...@magine.com>
Subject Re: Version 2 outreach?
Date Mon, 17 Aug 2015 11:11:36 GMT
Perhaps the Zookeeper project should split out a client library module
(which should only depend on SLF4J-API).

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

> If you will note, Christian put in a plug for Log4j 2 quite some time ago
> in that Jira issue. From reading the issue it seems to me that Zookeeper
> must be using some convoluted processes in their build with all the
> problems they had getting patches to apply.  Also, they ship an executable
> binary, which makes it difficult to not include a logging implementation.
> Flume also does this - which reminds me to open an issue with them.
>
> Ralph
>
> On Aug 17, 2015, at 1:40 AM, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.staldal@magine.com>
> wrote:
>
> It's OK if a library uses SLF4J properly. However, some libraries (even
> Apache ones) uses SLF4J improperly by having a mandatory dependency on a
> specific implementation (logj4 1 or logback) in their project. Such as
> Zookeeper:
>
>
> https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.6/zookeeper-3.4.6.pom
>
> This is very unfortunately since Zookeeper is a dependency for quite a lot
> of other projects, and causes quite a lot of headache if you want to use
> Log4j 2 (you have to exclude dependencies). There is an old JIRA ticket for
> it, but it has not been prioritized:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1371
>
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:27 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Gary,
>>
>> Do you have something in mind?  While not hard, it is a fair amount of
>> work for an application to switch to a different logging API. Granted, it
>> is mostly just changing the call to get a Logger. But most applications
>> should also take advantage of the new parameter syntax as well.
>>
>> What was your experience with projects upgrading to commons lang3 vs
>> commons lang?  I know quite a few people are still using commons httpclient
>> vs the new version, and that has been around a lot longer than Log4j 2.
>> What I really hope is that we stopped projects from switching from log4j 1
>> to logback, although I am aware that many projects are using slf4j instead
>> and letting their customers choose.  Frankly, if I hadn’t found limitations
>> (such as the ability to use Messages) in SLF4J I would have used that as
>> the API for Log4j 2 (I am quite happy we didn’t).
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 2:34 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Something to think about after we get 2.4 out the door...
>>
>> Do you think it appropriate for us to do some kind of outreach to other
>> Apache projects and say "hey, about about use log4j 2?"
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> [image: MagineTV]
>
> *Mikael Ståldal*
> Senior backend developer
>
> *Magine TV*
> mikael.staldal@magine.com
> Regeringsgatan 25  | 111 53 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
>
> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not
> copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply
> email.
>
>


-- 
[image: MagineTV]

*Mikael Ståldal*
Senior backend developer

*Magine TV*
mikael.staldal@magine.com
Regeringsgatan 25  | 111 53 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com

Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
(or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not
copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply
email.

Mime
View raw message