slf4j in 1.0?

[Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

The issue JCR-215 proposes to use the SLF4J logging facade in
Jackrabbit instead of directly using log4j. The issue has been on hold
waiting for a stable version of SLF4J.

SLF4J is getting very close to a 1.0 release (now in release candidate
5), so I'm thinking that we might perhaps want to make the
log4j->slf4j switch before the 1.0 release. This would avoid the
trouble of changing the logging framework between future Jackrabbit
releases.

Unless anyone objects, I'll tag JCR-215 for the 1.0 release and
prepare for making the switch once SLF4J 1.0 is out.

PS. See the links in JCR-215 for backround and reasons for making the switch.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

--
Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - info@yukatan.fi
Software craftmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development

Re: slf4j in 1.0?

[Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>]

Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The issue JCR-215 proposes to use the SLF4J logging facade in
> Jackrabbit instead of directly using log4j. The issue has been on hold
> waiting for a stable version of SLF4J.
> 
> SLF4J is getting very close to a 1.0 release (now in release candidate
> 5), so I'm thinking that we might perhaps want to make the
> log4j->slf4j switch before the 1.0 release. This would avoid the
> trouble of changing the logging framework between future Jackrabbit
> releases.
> 
> Unless anyone objects, I'll tag JCR-215 for the 1.0 release and
> prepare for making the switch once SLF4J 1.0 is out.

+1

-- 
Stefano.