You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org> on 2020/05/31 15:57:22 UTC
Plexus Logging API
Moved from slack per suggestion:
The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
"Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven implementation
writing to stdout.
We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for a
logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and while
SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2. All the
hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other systems
function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
implementation they like in their components, while still being able
to have integrated logging."
Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and replace it
with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API pulls in a
lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@ibiblio.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Sylwester Lachiewicz <sl...@gmail.com>.
We are talking about Maven Core and package org.codehaus.plexus.logging.
right?
If I understand correctly the current dependency tree - it's imported and
used from org.eclipse.sisu:org.eclipse.sisu.plexus artifact
In general +1 to move all internal Logger instances to from Plexus to SLF4J
S.
niedz., 31 maj 2020 o 19:41 Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>
napisał(a):
> Some pro's and cons:
>
> There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially because it is
> maintained by only one person.
> Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J, it still is
> a risk.
> Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a third
> party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means could switch
> to another framework at any time.
> That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework, as
> available since Java 1.4
>
> On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so even in the
> worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the current
> SLF4J API.
>
> One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid of
> the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the components
> very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
>
> thanks,
> Robert
> On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org> wrote:
> To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus logging
> API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to chamge
> some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
> >
> > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me,
> otherwise I
> > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the distro.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > | Old Blog
> > | Github |
> > LinkedIn | Book
> >
> >
> >
> > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> >
> > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > >
> > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > > >
> > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven implementation
> > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for a
> > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and while
> > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2. All the
> > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other
> systems
> > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > > implementation they like in their components, while still being able
> > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > >
> > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and replace it
> > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API pulls in a
> > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> elharo@ibiblio.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Le lun. 1 juin 2020 à 13:39, Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org> a
écrit :
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 1:06 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > So overall: +1 to clean up any internal from plexus but we should keep in
> > mind we must not expose SLF4J in *plugins* - once again it sounds like 2
> > topics even if it could be a single one to unify the logging in the whole
> > maven project.
> >
>
> Can you elaborate on what you mean by "expose"? No SLF4J types in
> public APIs? No transitive dependencies on SLF4J?
>
No promoted SLF4J package in the public API.
>
> So far what I'm gathering is that we should move away from Plexus
> logging toward SLF4J.
>
I agree but it impacts mojos (
https://github.com/apache/maven/blob/9567da2bc889a94f5c3b692b4afb310ddbacd6e5/maven-plugin-api/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/monitor/logging/DefaultLog.java)
but it is already backed by slf4j so guess while API is not broken nor
changes it is good to me.
>
> --
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> elharo@ibiblio.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 1:06 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So overall: +1 to clean up any internal from plexus but we should keep in
> mind we must not expose SLF4J in *plugins* - once again it sounds like 2
> topics even if it could be a single one to unify the logging in the whole
> maven project.
>
Can you elaborate on what you mean by "expose"? No SLF4J types in
public APIs? No transitive dependencies on SLF4J?
So far what I'm gathering is that we should move away from Plexus
logging toward SLF4J.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@ibiblio.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 23:26, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> We made a community decision years ago to support slf4j. It's not helpful
> to cast aspersions on it. If someone wants to lead an effort to supplant
> that with log4j now that it's alive again, or even jul (please, no),
> someone can start that process. Until then, using slf4j in an plugin is an
> approved and reasonable decision, I think.
>
I don't think so, most plugins don't respect that. Maybe it got discussed
and approved years ago but it hasn't been done nor ack by the users AFAIK.
And I think it would be a pain cause then we can't fix all the bugs we have
with SLF4J currently due to its binding/SPI design - guess we must enhance
our own binding anyway to support to ignore itself to use a user provided
one?
So overall: +1 to clean up any internal from plexus but we should keep in
mind we must not expose SLF4J in *plugins* - once again it sounds like 2
topics even if it could be a single one to unify the logging in the whole
maven project.
>
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 2:00 PM Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I'd be happy to use JUL instead if that works better. No extra
> > dependencies at all, and presumably no version conflicts.
> >
> > For the moment I'm not proposing any major changes to existing APIs,
> > aside from perhaps marking some classes no longer implement
> > AbstractLogEnabled. My question is when we have the typical logging
> > cases in a plugin or library, i.e.
> >
> > 1. An exception is thrown and we want to log an error
> > 2. We want to print some output from the plugin on the console
> >
> > What API do we invoke? The simplest thing we could possibly do is call
> >
> > Logger.getAnonymousLogger().warn( "message", ex );
> >
> > but whatever folks prefer is fine with me.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 3:41 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > True but JUL is also there since more time, no?
> > >
> > > More seriously I think most plugins stick to getLog and bridge the
> output
> > > cause otherwise the behavior is often undefined depending the stack.
> > >
> > > For ex, exec:java maven plugin generally breaks slf4j binding, so most
> > impl
> > > caring of logs (:run) just forward it to the secured api which is Log.
> > >
> > > If we want to discuss plugin logging api i think we need another thread
> > but
> > > i wouldnt pick slf4j.
> > >
> > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 21:35, Sylwester Lachiewicz <
> slachiewicz@gmail.com>
> > a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > Just note - we already have SLF4J API from Maven 3.1 [1] available
> for
> > all
> > > > plugins since 2013.
> > > >
> > > > Sylwester
> > > > [1] http://maven.apache.org/maven-logging.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > niedz., 31 maj 2020 o 20:49 Xeno Amess <xe...@gmail.com>
> > napisał(a):
> > > >
> > > > > I like slf4j.
> > > > > But slf4j can cause dependency hell as it really lack something
> > > > > named backward compatibility.
> > > > > I met that thing in one of my repo.
> > > > > Really bad experience for me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月1日周一 上午2:35写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hmm,we are already bound to slf4j simple logger by conf and we
> dont
> > > > want
> > > > > to
> > > > > > break it so less costly is slf4j, will avoid to reimpl the
> binding
> > > > > (needed
> > > > > > with jul and log4j)...but does not solve all issues with plugins
> > and
> > > > > > conflicts (jul would). That said not sure we can do better
> without
> > a
> > > > huge
> > > > > > investment not worth it so let's clean things a bit if we can or
> > just
> > > > > keep
> > > > > > it as it since it does not hurt at all IMHO.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 20:24, Gary Gregory <
> garydgregory@gmail.com>
> > a
> > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm sure you all know that Apache's own Log4j 2 has it's own
> API
> > > > facade
> > > > > > > with a backing implementation and bridges to other logging
> > systems
> > > > like
> > > > > > > SLF4 and Logback, and Java Logging. Not only that but it is
> > actively
> > > > > > > maintained by more than a single BDFL (like yours truly) I
> won't
> > > > > debate
> > > > > > > the pros vs slf4j...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ;-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gary
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 13:41 Robert Scholte <
> rfscholte@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Some pro's and cons:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially
> > because it
> > > > is
> > > > > > > > maintained by only one person.
> > > > > > > > Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J,
> > it
> > > > > still
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > a risk.
> > > > > > > > Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> > > > > > > > Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus
> as a
> > > > third
> > > > > > > > party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means
> > could
> > > > > > > switch
> > > > > > > > to another framework at any time.
> > > > > > > > That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging
> Framework,
> > as
> > > > > > > > available since Java 1.4
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so
> > even
> > > > in
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using
> the
> > > > > current
> > > > > > > > SLF4J API.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid
> > of
> > > > > > > > the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the
> > > > > > components
> > > > > > > > very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > > > Robert
> > > > > > > > On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <
> > elharo@ibiblio.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus
> > > > logging
> > > > > > > > API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to
> > > > chamge
> > > > > > > > some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from
> > me,
> > > > > > > > otherwise I
> > > > > > > > > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added
> > to the
> > > > > > > distro.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > > > > > > > > | Old Blog
> > > > > > > > > | Github |
> > > > > > > > > LinkedIn | Book
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two
> > minds:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven
> > > > > > implementation
> > > > > > > > > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > > > > > > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best
> > option
> > > > for
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of
> > ubiquity
> > > > and
> > > > > > > while
> > > > > > > > > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard
> and
> > it's
> > > > > > > > > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > > > > > > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and
> > Log4j2.
> > > > > All
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels
> for
> > > > other
> > > > > > > > systems
> > > > > > > > > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever
> > logging
> > > > > > > > > > > implementation they like in their components, while
> still
> > > > being
> > > > > > > able
> > > > > > > > > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API
> and
> > > > > replace
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging
> > API
> > > > > pulls
> > > > > > > in a
> > > > > > > > > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > elharo@ibiblio.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
We made a community decision years ago to support slf4j. It's not helpful
to cast aspersions on it. If someone wants to lead an effort to supplant
that with log4j now that it's alive again, or even jul (please, no),
someone can start that process. Until then, using slf4j in an plugin is an
approved and reasonable decision, I think.
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 2:00 PM Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>
wrote:
> I'd be happy to use JUL instead if that works better. No extra
> dependencies at all, and presumably no version conflicts.
>
> For the moment I'm not proposing any major changes to existing APIs,
> aside from perhaps marking some classes no longer implement
> AbstractLogEnabled. My question is when we have the typical logging
> cases in a plugin or library, i.e.
>
> 1. An exception is thrown and we want to log an error
> 2. We want to print some output from the plugin on the console
>
> What API do we invoke? The simplest thing we could possibly do is call
>
> Logger.getAnonymousLogger().warn( "message", ex );
>
> but whatever folks prefer is fine with me.
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 3:41 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> <rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > True but JUL is also there since more time, no?
> >
> > More seriously I think most plugins stick to getLog and bridge the output
> > cause otherwise the behavior is often undefined depending the stack.
> >
> > For ex, exec:java maven plugin generally breaks slf4j binding, so most
> impl
> > caring of logs (:run) just forward it to the secured api which is Log.
> >
> > If we want to discuss plugin logging api i think we need another thread
> but
> > i wouldnt pick slf4j.
> >
> > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 21:35, Sylwester Lachiewicz <sl...@gmail.com>
> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Just note - we already have SLF4J API from Maven 3.1 [1] available for
> all
> > > plugins since 2013.
> > >
> > > Sylwester
> > > [1] http://maven.apache.org/maven-logging.html
> > >
> > >
> > > niedz., 31 maj 2020 o 20:49 Xeno Amess <xe...@gmail.com>
> napisał(a):
> > >
> > > > I like slf4j.
> > > > But slf4j can cause dependency hell as it really lack something
> > > > named backward compatibility.
> > > > I met that thing in one of my repo.
> > > > Really bad experience for me.
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月1日周一 上午2:35写道：
> > > >
> > > > > Hmm,we are already bound to slf4j simple logger by conf and we dont
> > > want
> > > > to
> > > > > break it so less costly is slf4j, will avoid to reimpl the binding
> > > > (needed
> > > > > with jul and log4j)...but does not solve all issues with plugins
> and
> > > > > conflicts (jul would). That said not sure we can do better without
> a
> > > huge
> > > > > investment not worth it so let's clean things a bit if we can or
> just
> > > > keep
> > > > > it as it since it does not hurt at all IMHO.
> > > > >
> > > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 20:24, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'm sure you all know that Apache's own Log4j 2 has it's own API
> > > facade
> > > > > > with a backing implementation and bridges to other logging
> systems
> > > like
> > > > > > SLF4 and Logback, and Java Logging. Not only that but it is
> actively
> > > > > > maintained by more than a single BDFL (like yours truly) I won't
> > > > debate
> > > > > > the pros vs slf4j...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gary
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 13:41 Robert Scholte <rfscholte@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Some pro's and cons:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially
> because it
> > > is
> > > > > > > maintained by only one person.
> > > > > > > Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J,
> it
> > > > still
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > a risk.
> > > > > > > Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> > > > > > > Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a
> > > third
> > > > > > > party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means
> could
> > > > > > switch
> > > > > > > to another framework at any time.
> > > > > > > That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework,
> as
> > > > > > > available since Java 1.4
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so
> even
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the
> > > > current
> > > > > > > SLF4J API.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid
> of
> > > > > > > the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the
> > > > > components
> > > > > > > very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > > Robert
> > > > > > > On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <
> elharo@ibiblio.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus
> > > logging
> > > > > > > API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to
> > > chamge
> > > > > > > some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from
> me,
> > > > > > > otherwise I
> > > > > > > > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added
> to the
> > > > > > distro.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > > > > > > > | Old Blog
> > > > > > > > | Github |
> > > > > > > > LinkedIn | Book
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two
> minds:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven
> > > > > implementation
> > > > > > > > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > > > > > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best
> option
> > > for
> > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of
> ubiquity
> > > and
> > > > > > while
> > > > > > > > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and
> it's
> > > > > > > > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > > > > > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and
> Log4j2.
> > > > All
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for
> > > other
> > > > > > > systems
> > > > > > > > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever
> logging
> > > > > > > > > > implementation they like in their components, while still
> > > being
> > > > > > able
> > > > > > > > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and
> > > > replace
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging
> API
> > > > pulls
> > > > > > in a
> > > > > > > > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> elharo@ibiblio.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>.
I'd be happy to use JUL instead if that works better. No extra
dependencies at all, and presumably no version conflicts.
For the moment I'm not proposing any major changes to existing APIs,
aside from perhaps marking some classes no longer implement
AbstractLogEnabled. My question is when we have the typical logging
cases in a plugin or library, i.e.
1. An exception is thrown and we want to log an error
2. We want to print some output from the plugin on the console
What API do we invoke? The simplest thing we could possibly do is call
Logger.getAnonymousLogger().warn( "message", ex );
but whatever folks prefer is fine with me.
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 3:41 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
<rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> True but JUL is also there since more time, no?
>
> More seriously I think most plugins stick to getLog and bridge the output
> cause otherwise the behavior is often undefined depending the stack.
>
> For ex, exec:java maven plugin generally breaks slf4j binding, so most impl
> caring of logs (:run) just forward it to the secured api which is Log.
>
> If we want to discuss plugin logging api i think we need another thread but
> i wouldnt pick slf4j.
>
> Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 21:35, Sylwester Lachiewicz <sl...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > Just note - we already have SLF4J API from Maven 3.1 [1] available for all
> > plugins since 2013.
> >
> > Sylwester
> > [1] http://maven.apache.org/maven-logging.html
> >
> >
> > niedz., 31 maj 2020 o 20:49 Xeno Amess <xe...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> >
> > > I like slf4j.
> > > But slf4j can cause dependency hell as it really lack something
> > > named backward compatibility.
> > > I met that thing in one of my repo.
> > > Really bad experience for me.
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月1日周一 上午2:35写道：
> > >
> > > > Hmm,we are already bound to slf4j simple logger by conf and we dont
> > want
> > > to
> > > > break it so less costly is slf4j, will avoid to reimpl the binding
> > > (needed
> > > > with jul and log4j)...but does not solve all issues with plugins and
> > > > conflicts (jul would). That said not sure we can do better without a
> > huge
> > > > investment not worth it so let's clean things a bit if we can or just
> > > keep
> > > > it as it since it does not hurt at all IMHO.
> > > >
> > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 20:24, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > I'm sure you all know that Apache's own Log4j 2 has it's own API
> > facade
> > > > > with a backing implementation and bridges to other logging systems
> > like
> > > > > SLF4 and Logback, and Java Logging. Not only that but it is actively
> > > > > maintained by more than a single BDFL (like yours truly) I won't
> > > debate
> > > > > the pros vs slf4j...
> > > > >
> > > > > ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 13:41 Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Some pro's and cons:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially because it
> > is
> > > > > > maintained by only one person.
> > > > > > Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J, it
> > > still
> > > > is
> > > > > > a risk.
> > > > > > Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> > > > > > Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a
> > third
> > > > > > party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means could
> > > > > switch
> > > > > > to another framework at any time.
> > > > > > That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework, as
> > > > > > available since Java 1.4
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so even
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > > worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the
> > > current
> > > > > > SLF4J API.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid of
> > > > > > the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the
> > > > components
> > > > > > very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > Robert
> > > > > > On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus
> > logging
> > > > > > API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to
> > chamge
> > > > > > some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me,
> > > > > > otherwise I
> > > > > > > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the
> > > > > distro.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > > > > > > | Old Blog
> > > > > > > | Github |
> > > > > > > LinkedIn | Book
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven
> > > > implementation
> > > > > > > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > > > > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option
> > for
> > > a
> > > > > > > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity
> > and
> > > > > while
> > > > > > > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > > > > > > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > > > > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2.
> > > All
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for
> > other
> > > > > > systems
> > > > > > > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > > > > > > > implementation they like in their components, while still
> > being
> > > > > able
> > > > > > > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and
> > > replace
> > > > it
> > > > > > > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API
> > > pulls
> > > > > in a
> > > > > > > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@ibiblio.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Sylwester Lachiewicz <sl...@gmail.com>.
niedz., 31 maj 2020 o 21:41 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
napisał(a):
> True but JUL is also there since more time, no?
I meant that the SLF4J API is delivered with the Maven 3.1 installation
> More seriously I think most plugins stick to getLog and bridge the output
> cause otherwise the behavior is often undefined depending the stack.
>
> For ex, exec:java maven plugin generally breaks slf4j binding, so most impl
> caring of logs (:run) just forward it to the secured api which is Log.
>
> If we want to discuss plugin logging api i think we need another thread but
> i wouldnt pick slf4j.
>
We already have org.apache.maven.plugin.AbstractMojo#getLog that
returns org.apache.maven.plugin.logging.Log
In Core, we inject SLF4J based implementation of Plexus
org.codehaus.plexus.logging.Logger
interface [1].
So getLog() for plugins will stay in Maven "forever" and same with existing
availability o SLF4J API.
We are currently planning to raise the requirements for our plugins to
require Maven 3.1 so that they can also be used with SLF4J. Dropping Plexus
logging in Core is the next step to unify internal logging.
[1]
https://github.com/apache/maven/blob/master/maven-core/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugin/internal/DefaultMavenPluginManager.java#L571-L575
Sylwester
> Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 21:35, Sylwester Lachiewicz <sl...@gmail.com>
> a
> écrit :
>
> > Just note - we already have SLF4J API from Maven 3.1 [1] available for
> all
> > plugins since 2013.
> >
> > Sylwester
> > [1] http://maven.apache.org/maven-logging.html
> >
> >
> > niedz., 31 maj 2020 o 20:49 Xeno Amess <xe...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> >
> > > I like slf4j.
> > > But slf4j can cause dependency hell as it really lack something
> > > named backward compatibility.
> > > I met that thing in one of my repo.
> > > Really bad experience for me.
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月1日周一 上午2:35写道：
> > >
> > > > Hmm,we are already bound to slf4j simple logger by conf and we dont
> > want
> > > to
> > > > break it so less costly is slf4j, will avoid to reimpl the binding
> > > (needed
> > > > with jul and log4j)...but does not solve all issues with plugins and
> > > > conflicts (jul would). That said not sure we can do better without a
> > huge
> > > > investment not worth it so let's clean things a bit if we can or just
> > > keep
> > > > it as it since it does not hurt at all IMHO.
> > > >
> > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 20:24, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > I'm sure you all know that Apache's own Log4j 2 has it's own API
> > facade
> > > > > with a backing implementation and bridges to other logging systems
> > like
> > > > > SLF4 and Logback, and Java Logging. Not only that but it is
> actively
> > > > > maintained by more than a single BDFL (like yours truly) I won't
> > > debate
> > > > > the pros vs slf4j...
> > > > >
> > > > > ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 13:41 Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Some pro's and cons:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially because
> it
> > is
> > > > > > maintained by only one person.
> > > > > > Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J, it
> > > still
> > > > is
> > > > > > a risk.
> > > > > > Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> > > > > > Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a
> > third
> > > > > > party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means
> could
> > > > > switch
> > > > > > to another framework at any time.
> > > > > > That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework, as
> > > > > > available since Java 1.4
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so even
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > > worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the
> > > current
> > > > > > SLF4J API.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid of
> > > > > > the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the
> > > > components
> > > > > > very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > Robert
> > > > > > On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@ibiblio.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus
> > logging
> > > > > > API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to
> > chamge
> > > > > > some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me,
> > > > > > otherwise I
> > > > > > > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to
> the
> > > > > distro.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > > > > > > | Old Blog
> > > > > > > | Github |
> > > > > > > LinkedIn | Book
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven
> > > > implementation
> > > > > > > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > > > > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option
> > for
> > > a
> > > > > > > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity
> > and
> > > > > while
> > > > > > > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and
> it's
> > > > > > > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > > > > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and
> Log4j2.
> > > All
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for
> > other
> > > > > > systems
> > > > > > > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > > > > > > > implementation they like in their components, while still
> > being
> > > > > able
> > > > > > > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and
> > > replace
> > > > it
> > > > > > > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API
> > > pulls
> > > > > in a
> > > > > > > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
True but JUL is also there since more time, no?
More seriously I think most plugins stick to getLog and bridge the output
cause otherwise the behavior is often undefined depending the stack.
For ex, exec:java maven plugin generally breaks slf4j binding, so most impl
caring of logs (:run) just forward it to the secured api which is Log.
If we want to discuss plugin logging api i think we need another thread but
i wouldnt pick slf4j.
Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 21:35, Sylwester Lachiewicz <sl...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> Just note - we already have SLF4J API from Maven 3.1 [1] available for all
> plugins since 2013.
>
> Sylwester
> [1] http://maven.apache.org/maven-logging.html
>
>
> niedz., 31 maj 2020 o 20:49 Xeno Amess <xe...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
>
> > I like slf4j.
> > But slf4j can cause dependency hell as it really lack something
> > named backward compatibility.
> > I met that thing in one of my repo.
> > Really bad experience for me.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月1日周一 上午2:35写道：
> >
> > > Hmm,we are already bound to slf4j simple logger by conf and we dont
> want
> > to
> > > break it so less costly is slf4j, will avoid to reimpl the binding
> > (needed
> > > with jul and log4j)...but does not solve all issues with plugins and
> > > conflicts (jul would). That said not sure we can do better without a
> huge
> > > investment not worth it so let's clean things a bit if we can or just
> > keep
> > > it as it since it does not hurt at all IMHO.
> > >
> > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 20:24, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > I'm sure you all know that Apache's own Log4j 2 has it's own API
> facade
> > > > with a backing implementation and bridges to other logging systems
> like
> > > > SLF4 and Logback, and Java Logging. Not only that but it is actively
> > > > maintained by more than a single BDFL (like yours truly) I won't
> > debate
> > > > the pros vs slf4j...
> > > >
> > > > ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Gary
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 13:41 Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Some pro's and cons:
> > > > >
> > > > > There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially because it
> is
> > > > > maintained by only one person.
> > > > > Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J, it
> > still
> > > is
> > > > > a risk.
> > > > > Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> > > > > Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a
> third
> > > > > party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means could
> > > > switch
> > > > > to another framework at any time.
> > > > > That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework, as
> > > > > available since Java 1.4
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so even
> in
> > > the
> > > > > worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the
> > current
> > > > > SLF4J API.
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid of
> > > > > the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the
> > > components
> > > > > very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > > Robert
> > > > > On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus
> logging
> > > > > API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to
> chamge
> > > > > some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me,
> > > > > otherwise I
> > > > > > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the
> > > > distro.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > > > > > | Old Blog
> > > > > > | Github |
> > > > > > LinkedIn | Book
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven
> > > implementation
> > > > > > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > > > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option
> for
> > a
> > > > > > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity
> and
> > > > while
> > > > > > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > > > > > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > > > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2.
> > All
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for
> other
> > > > > systems
> > > > > > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > > > > > > implementation they like in their components, while still
> being
> > > > able
> > > > > > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and
> > replace
> > > it
> > > > > > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API
> > pulls
> > > > in a
> > > > > > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Sylwester Lachiewicz <sl...@gmail.com>.
Just note - we already have SLF4J API from Maven 3.1 [1] available for all
plugins since 2013.
Sylwester
[1] http://maven.apache.org/maven-logging.html
niedz., 31 maj 2020 o 20:49 Xeno Amess <xe...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> I like slf4j.
> But slf4j can cause dependency hell as it really lack something
> named backward compatibility.
> I met that thing in one of my repo.
> Really bad experience for me.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月1日周一 上午2:35写道：
>
> > Hmm,we are already bound to slf4j simple logger by conf and we dont want
> to
> > break it so less costly is slf4j, will avoid to reimpl the binding
> (needed
> > with jul and log4j)...but does not solve all issues with plugins and
> > conflicts (jul would). That said not sure we can do better without a huge
> > investment not worth it so let's clean things a bit if we can or just
> keep
> > it as it since it does not hurt at all IMHO.
> >
> > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 20:24, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > I'm sure you all know that Apache's own Log4j 2 has it's own API facade
> > > with a backing implementation and bridges to other logging systems like
> > > SLF4 and Logback, and Java Logging. Not only that but it is actively
> > > maintained by more than a single BDFL (like yours truly) I won't
> debate
> > > the pros vs slf4j...
> > >
> > > ;-)
> > >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 13:41 Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Some pro's and cons:
> > > >
> > > > There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially because it is
> > > > maintained by only one person.
> > > > Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J, it
> still
> > is
> > > > a risk.
> > > > Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> > > > Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a third
> > > > party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means could
> > > switch
> > > > to another framework at any time.
> > > > That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework, as
> > > > available since Java 1.4
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so even in
> > the
> > > > worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the
> current
> > > > SLF4J API.
> > > >
> > > > One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid of
> > > > the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the
> > components
> > > > very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > > Robert
> > > > On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus logging
> > > > API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to chamge
> > > > some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me,
> > > > otherwise I
> > > > > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the
> > > distro.
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > > > > | Old Blog
> > > > > | Github |
> > > > > LinkedIn | Book
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven
> > implementation
> > > > > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for
> a
> > > > > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and
> > > while
> > > > > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > > > > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2.
> All
> > > the
> > > > > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other
> > > > systems
> > > > > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > > > > > implementation they like in their components, while still being
> > > able
> > > > > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and
> replace
> > it
> > > > > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API
> pulls
> > > in a
> > > > > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Xeno Amess <xe...@gmail.com>.
I like slf4j.
But slf4j can cause dependency hell as it really lack something
named backward compatibility.
I met that thing in one of my repo.
Really bad experience for me.
Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月1日周一 上午2:35写道：
> Hmm,we are already bound to slf4j simple logger by conf and we dont want to
> break it so less costly is slf4j, will avoid to reimpl the binding (needed
> with jul and log4j)...but does not solve all issues with plugins and
> conflicts (jul would). That said not sure we can do better without a huge
> investment not worth it so let's clean things a bit if we can or just keep
> it as it since it does not hurt at all IMHO.
>
> Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 20:24, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > I'm sure you all know that Apache's own Log4j 2 has it's own API facade
> > with a backing implementation and bridges to other logging systems like
> > SLF4 and Logback, and Java Logging. Not only that but it is actively
> > maintained by more than a single BDFL (like yours truly) I won't debate
> > the pros vs slf4j...
> >
> > ;-)
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 13:41 Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Some pro's and cons:
> > >
> > > There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially because it is
> > > maintained by only one person.
> > > Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J, it still
> is
> > > a risk.
> > > Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> > > Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a third
> > > party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means could
> > switch
> > > to another framework at any time.
> > > That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework, as
> > > available since Java 1.4
> > >
> > > On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so even in
> the
> > > worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the current
> > > SLF4J API.
> > >
> > > One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid of
> > > the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the
> components
> > > very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > Robert
> > > On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>
> wrote:
> > > To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus logging
> > > API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to chamge
> > > some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me,
> > > otherwise I
> > > > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the
> > distro.
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > > > | Old Blog
> > > > | Github |
> > > > LinkedIn | Book
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven
> implementation
> > > > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for a
> > > > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and
> > while
> > > > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > > > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2. All
> > the
> > > > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other
> > > systems
> > > > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > > > > implementation they like in their components, while still being
> > able
> > > > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and replace
> it
> > > > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API pulls
> > in a
> > > > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Hmm,we are already bound to slf4j simple logger by conf and we dont want to
break it so less costly is slf4j, will avoid to reimpl the binding (needed
with jul and log4j)...but does not solve all issues with plugins and
conflicts (jul would). That said not sure we can do better without a huge
investment not worth it so let's clean things a bit if we can or just keep
it as it since it does not hurt at all IMHO.
Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 20:24, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> I'm sure you all know that Apache's own Log4j 2 has it's own API facade
> with a backing implementation and bridges to other logging systems like
> SLF4 and Logback, and Java Logging. Not only that but it is actively
> maintained by more than a single BDFL (like yours truly) I won't debate
> the pros vs slf4j...
>
> ;-)
>
> Gary
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2020, 13:41 Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Some pro's and cons:
> >
> > There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially because it is
> > maintained by only one person.
> > Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J, it still is
> > a risk.
> > Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> > Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a third
> > party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means could
> switch
> > to another framework at any time.
> > That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework, as
> > available since Java 1.4
> >
> > On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so even in the
> > worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the current
> > SLF4J API.
> >
> > One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid of
> > the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the components
> > very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
> >
> > thanks,
> > Robert
> > On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org> wrote:
> > To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus logging
> > API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to chamge
> > some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
> >
> > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me,
> > otherwise I
> > > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the
> distro.
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > > | Old Blog
> > > | Github |
> > > LinkedIn | Book
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> > >
> > > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > > >
> > > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven implementation
> > > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for a
> > > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and
> while
> > > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2. All
> the
> > > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other
> > systems
> > > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > > > implementation they like in their components, while still being
> able
> > > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > > >
> > > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and replace it
> > > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API pulls
> in a
> > > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > elharo@ibiblio.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
I'm sure you all know that Apache's own Log4j 2 has it's own API facade
with a backing implementation and bridges to other logging systems like
SLF4 and Logback, and Java Logging. Not only that but it is actively
maintained by more than a single BDFL (like yours truly) I won't debate
the pros vs slf4j...
;-)
Gary
On Sun, May 31, 2020, 13:41 Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org> wrote:
> Some pro's and cons:
>
> There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially because it is
> maintained by only one person.
> Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J, it still is
> a risk.
> Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
> Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a third
> party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means could switch
> to another framework at any time.
> That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework, as
> available since Java 1.4
>
> On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so even in the
> worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the current
> SLF4J API.
>
> One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid of
> the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the components
> very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
>
> thanks,
> Robert
> On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org> wrote:
> To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus logging
> API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to chamge
> some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
> >
> > If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me,
> otherwise I
> > would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the distro.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau | Blog
> > | Old Blog
> > | Github |
> > LinkedIn | Book
> >
> >
> >
> > Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
> >
> > > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > > >
> > > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > > >
> > > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven implementation
> > > > writing to stdout.
> > > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for a
> > > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and while
> > > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2. All the
> > > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other
> systems
> > > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > > implementation they like in their components, while still being able
> > > > to have integrated logging."
> > > >
> > > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and replace it
> > > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API pulls in a
> > > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> elharo@ibiblio.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>.
Some pro's and cons:
There have always been concerns about SLF4J, especially because it is maintained by only one person.
Although Ceki did help us to make Maven work well with SLF4J, it still is a risk.
Depending on third party libraries always comes with a risk.
Having our own logging interfaces (I don't consider plexus as a third party library, as it is maintained by Maven developers) means could switch to another framework at any time.
That said, we might even switch to the Java Logging Framework, as available since Java 1.4
On the other hand, SLF4J has become the leading standard, so even in the worst case scenario I expect there will a way to keep using the current SLF4J API.
One of the benefits of dropping Plexus Logging is getting rid of the AbstractLogEnabled and LogEnabled classes, which bind the components very strict to the Plexus logging framework.
thanks,
Robert
On 31-5-2020 19:21:51, Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org> wrote:
To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus logging
API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to chamge
some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>
> If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me, otherwise I
> would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the distro.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau | Blog
> | Old Blog
> | Github |
> LinkedIn | Book
>
>
>
> Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
>
> > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> >
> > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > >
> > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > >
> > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven implementation
> > > writing to stdout.
> > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for a
> > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and while
> > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2. All the
> > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other systems
> > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > implementation they like in their components, while still being able
> > > to have integrated logging."
> > >
> > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and replace it
> > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API pulls in a
> > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@ibiblio.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>.
To be clear, my proposal is not to do anything to the plexus logging
API or the code in the plexus project. I simply would like to chamge
some Maven code to call SLF4J instead of Plexus logging.
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:43 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
<rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me, otherwise I
> would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the distro.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
> Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> a écrit :
>
> > +1 to rip out plexus logging
> >
> > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> > >
> > > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> > >
> > > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven implementation
> > > writing to stdout.
> > > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for a
> > > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and while
> > > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2. All the
> > > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other systems
> > > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > > implementation they like in their components, while still being able
> > > to have integrated logging."
> > >
> > > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and replace it
> > > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API pulls in a
> > > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > elharo@ibiblio.org
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@ibiblio.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
If it does not break mojos (thinking to getLog API) +1 from me, otherwise I
would be -1 until a compatibility module is properly added to the distro.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
Le dim. 31 mai 2020 à 18:38, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> a écrit :
> +1 to rip out plexus logging
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Moved from slack per suggestion:
> >
> > The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
> >
> > "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven implementation
> > writing to stdout.
> > We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for a
> > logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and while
> > SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> > pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> > implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2. All the
> > hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other systems
> > function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> > implementation they like in their components, while still being able
> > to have integrated logging."
> >
> > Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and replace it
> > with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API pulls in a
> > lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
> >
> > --
> > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > elharo@ibiblio.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Plexus Logging API
Posted by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>.
+1 to rip out plexus logging
On Sun, May 31, 2020, 17:58 Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>
wrote:
> Moved from slack per suggestion:
>
> The documentation on logging for Maven seems of two minds:
>
> "Maven uses [Plexus logging API][6] with basic Maven implementation
> writing to stdout.
> We have reached the decision that SLF4J is the best option for a
> logging API: SLF4J has reached a certain level of ubiquity and while
> SLF4J may not be perfect, it's the de facto standard and it's
> pointless to try and remake another one. There are many
> implementations to choose from, including Logback and Log4j2. All the
> hard work has been done. All the bridges and funnels for other systems
> function well, which allows others to use whatever logging
> implementation they like in their components, while still being able
> to have integrated logging."
>
> Does this mean we can rip out the Plexus logging API and replace it
> with SLF4J? In at least one plugin, the plexus logging API pulls in a
> lot of plexus code we wouldn't otherwise need.
>
> --
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> elharo@ibiblio.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>