logging-log4j-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: Three things I couldn't find on the Log4j 2 Site
Date Sun, 24 Mar 2013 20:22:43 GMT
First, while I've done a lot of the work up until this point Apache is a place where the community
makes the decisions. 

1) How stable is the API?  We recently had requests to add at least one log(level, ....) method
to the API.  That will probably be done. We have also had a request to convert the Level from
an enum back to an int.  I'd like more community input on that one.  It is likely new Message
types may be added but other than that I don't see the API changing much.

2) My hope would be to see GA this summer, but again, it is up to the community.

3) Each Log4j 2 component is a maven sub-project. The javadoc for each is there.  For example,
under "Components" click on API. Then under "Project Documentation" click on "Project Reports"
and then Javadocs.  The pattern is the same for each component.

4a) I would actually recommend SLF4J over Commons Logging if the application is looking for
an independent logging API.  
  b) Again, many applications want an independent API. That is why they choose Commons Logging
or SLF4J.  As you noted, Log4j 2's API is not intended as a replacement for SLF4J but as a
way for Log4j 2 users to know what is the public stuff they can safely code to and what is
part of the implementation and thus, more likely to change.
 c) The commons logging bridge provides the binding between Commons Logging and Log4j 2. 


On Mar 24, 2013, at 1:08 AM, Nick Williams wrote:

> I've been a Log4j 1 user for years and I love it. I'm currently writing a book for Java
EE 7 + Spring Framework 4 development and one of my chapters is on application logging. I
was going to cover Log4j 1 and then I stumbled upon Log4j 2. It looks like a serious improvement
over Log4j 1 and I'm quite excited about it. There are three important things that I couldn't
find on the site (I read the entire manual, and looked at what I thought were all of the pages,
but it's possible I've missing something). I'm hoping someone here can sort it out for me:
> 1) How stable is the API at this point? I understand the hazards of beta software, but
are we talking "it could be drastically different in six months" or "chances are it won't
change much from here on out?" I don't expect a precise answer, just some guidance.
> 2) What is the /projected/ GA date? I know that dates are never certain with open source
software, and I don't expect somebody to tell me that it'll be GA on July 21, 2013. But are
we talking weeks, months, or upwards of a year? If my book goes to press in November of this
year, do I risk that Log4j 2 isn't out by that time if I include it?
> 3) Where is the darned JavaDoc API documentation? I'm quite used to how easy it is to
find in the Commons, on the Tomcat site, and on the Log4j 1 site (there's a big link that
says "JavaDoc" in the sidebar). But I was rather flabbergasted by the fact that I couldn't
find any on the Log4j 2 site. Specifically, I'm looking for the JavaDoc pages for the API,
the Implementation, and the Commons Logging Bridge.
> Also, I have a general question about the API versus Commons Logging. For years my understanding,
reading, and training have told me to use Commons Logging so that the underlying implementation
could be easily switched out if needed (even though I have never strayed from Log4j). However,
with Log4j 2 it looks like the API being separated from the Implementation makes this an unnecessary
step, and could cause performance to suffer. So, I wonder:
> A) How important is using Commons Logging as a facade in front of Log4j anymore? It sounds
like it matters less now, and could cause performance to suffer.
> B) Should libraries still use Commons Logging, but applications start using the Log4j
2 API instead?
> C) Will my existing libraries using Commons Logging 1.1 play nicely with Log4j 2? Or
will they struggle to find a facility to log with? Do I need the Commons Logging Bridge to
make these existing libraries log properly (that's what it sounds like, but I want to make
> Thanks in advance for any answers I receive!
> Nick
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@logging.apache.org

To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@logging.apache.org

View raw message