You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mina.apache.org by "Trustin Lee (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2006/08/01 04:24:24 UTC
[jira] Created: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: DIRMINA-233
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
Project: Directory MINA
Issue Type: Task
Reporter: Trustin Lee
As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
Question regarding ThreadPoolFilter class
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@gmail.com>.
Hi guys,
I have a question about the class. It has been moved from
org/apache/mina/filter
to
org/apache/mina/filter/thread.
In the previous version (397284) we are using in ApachDS, there were a
method setMaximumPoolSize() which is not anymore present in the last
revision.
Is there any reason why this method has been removed, and is there any
substitute ?
Thanks a lot !
Re: [jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by Maarten Bosteels <mb...@gmail.com>.
I completely agree with Emmanuel.
Taking a decision based on the fact that mina *now* only has two places that
uses logging is dangerous: if MINA wants to become a "network platform" it
should not have these constraints. It should always be very easy to add
logging statements anywhere in the code. Removing a few logging statements
because they do not fit in the "abstraction layer" smells like a design
problem.
We are using log4j (no idea what the hell is wrong with it), but we also
need commons-logging because Spring depends on it.
And since we started using MINA, I also had to read the SLF4J docs, and I am
glad I did.
(I did not know that the classloader issues are solved in the latest CL
version)
MINA is the only library we use that depends on SLF4J but I really don't
mind.
If commons-logging really has solved all its infamous issues, than maybe
MINA
(and all other Apache projets) should switch to commons-logging, but if it
hasn't I think MINA should stick to SLF4J (or at least default to it)
On the other hand, it is a shame that there are so many java logging
toolkits which all have more or less the same features, and it's a shame
that not all Apache projects could agree on one logging toolkit, but that's
another story I guess ...
Maarten
On 8/1/06, robert.j.greig@jpmorgan.com <ro...@jpmorgan.com> wrote:
>
>
> Emmanuel, I agree. I think it would be better if MINA had more logging
> that could be switched on. For example, following on from the question
> Elizabeth raised, it would be nice to know when MINA is running through
> codec factories etc and what is going on when it is choosing a decoder to
> use.
>
> I like slf4j (and MINA was the first time I had used it) and since commons
> logging can work with slf4j I'd like to keep slf4j unless we are completely
> happy that commons logging has addressed all the classloader issues and so
> on.
>
> RG
>
>
>
> *"Emmanuel Lecharny" <el...@gmail.com>*
>
> 01/08/2006 16:10
> Please respond to mina-dev
>
> To: mina-dev@directory.apache.org
> cc:
> Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an
> extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
>
>
>
> Well, the question and concern should be : "why does mina log so little ?"
>
> In my mind, logging is really a must for any product, and especially for a
> framework. It helps users to understand what is happening, and also people
> who maintain the code to be able to understand user's problem, just asking
> them for smething more interesting and helpfull than a stacktrace.
>
> It may be just me, but I feel that mina is not logging enough, so
> targeting
> a "*NO* dependency just because of this lack of logs is a way to say that
> you don't need shampoo because you are bold ;)
>
> As we say in France : "Pas de bras, pas de chocolat " ;)
>
> PS: i'm not saying that Mina is badly written, just in case somone
> misinterpreted my opinion :)
>
> Emmanuel
>
> On 8/1/06, Julien Vermillard (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > [
> >
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424888
> ]
> >
> > Julien Vermillard commented on DIRMINA-233:
> > -------------------------------------------
> >
> > +1 I agree with Peter, the usage of logging MINA do is pretty small for
> > having a dependency
> >
> > > Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Key: DIRMINA-233
> > > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> > > Project: Directory MINA
> > > Issue Type: Task
> > > Reporter: Trustin Lee
> > >
> > > As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't
> > want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks
> such
> > as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J
> or
> > commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need
> to
> > meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network
> application
> > framework.
> >
> > --
> > This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> > -
> > If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
> > http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
> > -
> > For more information on JIRA, see:
> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Cordialement,
> Emmanuel Lécharny
>
>
>
> This communication is for informational purposes only. It is not intended
> as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial
> instrument or as an official confirmation of any transaction. All market
> prices, data and other information are not warranted as to completeness or
> accuracy and are subject to change without notice. Any comments or
> statements made herein do not necessarily reflect those of JPMorgan Chase &
> Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates.
>
> This transmission may contain information that is privileged,
> confidential, legally privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the
> information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY
> PROHIBITED. Although this transmission and any attachments are believed to
> be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system
> into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the
> recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted
> by JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates, as applicable, for
> any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. If you received this
> transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the
> material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank
> you.
>
Re: [jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@gmail.com>.
Well, the question and concern should be : "why does mina log so little ?"
In my mind, logging is really a must for any product, and especially for a
framework. It helps users to understand what is happening, and also people
who maintain the code to be able to understand user's problem, just asking
them for smething more interesting and helpfull than a stacktrace.
It may be just me, but I feel that mina is not logging enough, so targeting
a "*NO* dependency just because of this lack of logs is a way to say that
you don't need shampoo because you are bold ;)
As we say in France : "Pas de bras, pas de chocolat " ;)
PS: i'm not saying that Mina is badly written, just in case somone
misinterpreted my opinion :)
Emmanuel
On 8/1/06, Julien Vermillard (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> [
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424888]
>
> Julien Vermillard commented on DIRMINA-233:
> -------------------------------------------
>
> +1 I agree with Peter, the usage of logging MINA do is pretty small for
> having a dependency
>
> > Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Key: DIRMINA-233
> > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> > Project: Directory MINA
> > Issue Type: Task
> > Reporter: Trustin Lee
> >
> > As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't
> want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such
> as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or
> commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to
> meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application
> framework.
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
> -
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
>
>
--
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
Re: [jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@gmail.com>.
Ceki, this as a public comment, and as I have signed the CCLA, you can use
it freely :)
On 8/17/06, Ceki Gulcu (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> [
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12428632]
>
> Ceki Gulcu commented on DIRMINA-233:
> ------------------------------------
>
> > I *like* logs, a bad logs is always better than no log at all, and
> > good logs save big time, because on a production system, you can't
> > step through the code with your favorite IDE debugger. Beleive me or
> > not, I prefer 'grepping' and 'sedding' 2.5 Gb of logs than stepping
> > through 10K lines of code...
>
> Emmanuel, may I quote you on the above?
>
> > Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Key: DIRMINA-233
> > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> > Project: Directory MINA
> > Issue Type: Task
> > Reporter: Trustin Lee
> >
> > As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't
> want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such
> as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or
> commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to
> meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application
> framework.
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
> -
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
>
>
--
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
[jira] Updated: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Trustin Lee (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=all ]
Trustin Lee updated DIRMINA-233:
--------------------------------
Description: As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework. (was: As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.)
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Emmanuel Lecharny (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12428513 ]
Emmanuel Lecharny commented on DIRMINA-233:
-------------------------------------------
I will add as a comment something I already said on the mailing list, to be sure that it is stored in a remanent place :
-> this is not because MINA does not use logs extensivly that slf4j is bad or should be removed. In my mind, and for the sake of people who maintain the code, and for users who want to understand what's going on when they have problems, MINA does not have anough logs.
Logs are *good*. Using Logs is like writting test case. It's mandatory. With at least 2 api to write logs, not doing so is a sin. Amen ! (IMHO ;)
Hey, no offense ! Just wanted to express my opinion : I *like* logs, a bad logs is always better than no log at all, and good logs save big time, because on a production system, you can't step through the code with your favorite IDE debugger. Beleive me or not, I prefer 'grepping' and 'sedding' 2.5 Gb of logs than stepping through 10K lines of code...
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Ceki Gulcu (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12428632 ]
Ceki Gulcu commented on DIRMINA-233:
------------------------------------
> I *like* logs, a bad logs is always better than no log at all, and
> good logs save big time, because on a production system, you can't
> step through the code with your favorite IDE debugger. Beleive me or
> not, I prefer 'grepping' and 'sedding' 2.5 Gb of logs than stepping
> through 10K lines of code...
Emmanuel, may I quote you on the above?
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Julien Vermillard (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424776 ]
Julien Vermillard commented on DIRMINA-233:
-------------------------------------------
plus there isn't a lot of slf4j references in MINA, I think logging can be all done by user.
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Ceki Gulcu (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12428503 ]
Ceki Gulcu commented on DIRMINA-233:
------------------------------------
Logback, a purported successor to log4j, is based on the SLF4J API. In
fact, logback documentation explicitly refers to SLF4J as the
recommended way of writing log statements in your code.
I'd expect logback to equal log4j in functionality in the near future
and then surpass by a wide margin.
My point is that writing code against the SLF4J API will not be a
waste of your time.
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Karl Pauls (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12426286 ]
Karl Pauls commented on DIRMINA-233:
------------------------------------
I have spent some time myself addressing my product's internal logging API and have planned to support SLF4J since that was designed to be a universal logging facade. (remember when it was called UGLI?)
The other option is to adopt the JDK1.4 logging interface... since MINA requires 1.4 that would not introduce additional dependencies.
However, I'm personally rooting for SLF4J.
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Norman Maurer (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424774 ]
Norman Maurer commented on DIRMINA-233:
---------------------------------------
Well, we want to use MINA in next JAMES releases. JAMES use avalon. So such a logger interface whould be much better for us to "bridge" the MINA logger to the Avalon logger without need extra jars.
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "peter royal (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424862 ]
peter royal commented on DIRMINA-233:
-------------------------------------
There are two places in MINA that use a logger.
My thought is that we could have our own (very simple) logging abstraction that satisfies what these two places need. Heck, we could even default to slf4j, but allow the user to plug in an alternate implementation either by specifying a system property, or by manually setting it, similar to how the ByteBufferAllocator works.
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Rob Butler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424873 ]
Rob Butler commented on DIRMINA-233:
------------------------------------
The entire point of Commons-logging and SLF4J is to _be_ the thin logging abstraction layer and alleviate the need for every application, library and framework to re-implement the same code. I would highly recommend not building your own abstraction layer to abstract yourself from these abstraction layers. That is a very dangerous architecture anti-pattern.
Emmanuel had the right idea. SLF4J and Commons-logging are just facades above the real logging implementation. There is nothing to prevent Mina from using SLF4J and Spring using Commons-Logging and my application code from using log4j directly and having all of them use log4j under the covers. Mina's choice in logging abstraction implementation does not force a choice on users of Mina. It only would force them to include the SLF4J jar in their application and configure it to use the proper logger (whichever one their application uses). Having to include one small extra jar in an application isn't too much of a limitation.
As for QuickFIX/J and JAMES, they should be able to use Mina and simply configure SLF4J to write to their preferred logger implementation. If SLF4J doesn't supply an Avalon logger (or whatever) then they should build a plugin for the abstraction layer Mina already uses. Ideally they would contribute this implementation to SLF4J so that any application using SLF4J could log to Avalon. This shouldn't be any more work than building a plugin to a Mina custom logging abstraction layer.
Mina should definitely use either SLF4J or Commons-logging instead of building its own. However, you may want to consider converting to Commons-logging. Commons-logging is part of Apache and eating your own dog food is a good thing. Also, Commons-logging probably has a larger community and people are more familiar with it. SLF4J's claim to fame was it would resolve some of the classloader issues Commons-logging had, but they are supposed to have fixed that issue in the latest version. I think SLF4J's community probably will never be as strong as the Commons-logging one and there is some risk of SLF4J losing its community all together if it doesn't grow sufficient mass to be self sustaining.
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Julien Vermillard (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424888 ]
Julien Vermillard commented on DIRMINA-233:
-------------------------------------------
+1 I agree with Peter, the usage of logging MINA do is pretty small for having a dependency
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Emmanuel Lecharny (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424773 ]
Emmanuel Lecharny commented on DIRMINA-233:
-------------------------------------------
SLF4J is just a facade, and it's totally transparent for the user. If someone want to use log4j, then you just add the slf4j-log4j12.jar within mina jar, and it's ok. If it's going to be CL, you add slf4j-jcl.jar...
I don't think we need another layer or another logger.
If users have some problem with SLF4J, I think the best is to add a documentation about how to use it, or a link to http://www.slf4j.org/manual.html
wdyt ?
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "peter royal (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424884 ]
peter royal commented on DIRMINA-233:
-------------------------------------
Perhaps the words "logging abstraction" are the wrong ones. MINA has two places where it principally logs (the other 2-3 lines can be removed):
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/directory/trunks/mina/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/util/SessionLog.java?view=markup
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/directory/trunks/mina/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/common/support/DefaultExceptionMonitor.java?view=markup
The ExceptionMonitor is already pluggable. The SessionLog is not. What I would propose is the "Logger" mechanism in the SessionLog is implemented similarly to theExceptionMonitor so that one could easily plug in a SessionLog implementation that goes to the log toolkit of choice.
Thus MINA would have *NO* dependency on any logging abstraction. Having an extra dependency just for this small usage isn't necessarily worth it, and complicates things for users.
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Steve Bate (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12424783 ]
Steve Bate commented on DIRMINA-233:
------------------------------------
+1. We'd like this for the QuickFIX/J project as well (http://quickfixj.org/).
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "Trustin Lee (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=comments#action_12429594 ]
Trustin Lee commented on DIRMINA-233:
-------------------------------------
Then we'd better create a page on how to use SLF4J for their project briefly. I think this is one of the most FAQ. :)
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Resolved: (DIRMINA-233) Provide an extra thin logging layer
for those who don't want SLF4J
Posted by "peter royal (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233?page=all ]
peter royal resolved DIRMINA-233.
---------------------------------
Resolution: Won't Fix
Will remain with SLF4J. Users have spoken :)
> Provide an extra thin logging layer for those who don't want SLF4J
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DIRMINA-233
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-233
> Project: Directory MINA
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Trustin Lee
>
> As MINA gets more and more popular, the number of people who doesn't want SLF4J increased because they were using other logging frameworks such as Log4J or commons-logging. We know SLF4J provides what exactly Log4J or commons-logging provides, but it's just a matter of preference. We need to meet as many people's preference as we can as a general network application framework.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira