You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tapestry.apache.org by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> on 2011/01/18 16:31:50 UTC
Why log4j as a compile dep?
Why there's a log4j dep? ... Maybe I'm in the 0.00001% of applications
(who) will need to override this dependency to not use Log4J but why
using slf4j then "force" a log implementation?
Cheers
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why log4j as a compile dep?
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
That's a good suggestion.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Robert Zeigler
<ro...@roxanemy.com> wrote:
> Not a compile dependency, that I'm aware of. How many users start with the quickstart as a basis for new projects? If that's a large percentage, couldn't we move the log4j dependency declaration into the generated pom? Then it's even easier to change for people who want to change it, and removes the fishy dependency in tapestry-core. Making that change now would need a definite note in upgrade notes so that log4j users who were relying on the tapestry-supplied dependency would know to tweak their pom to add their own dep.
>
> Robert
>
> On Jan 18, 2011, at 1/1812:15 PM , Josh Canfield wrote:
>
>> :) I'm also moving to gradle so it's a different kind of magic.
>>
>> compile("org.apache.tapestry:tapestry-core:$tapestryVersion") {
>> exclude module: 'slf4j-log4j12'
>> exclude module: 'log4j'
>> }
>>
>> Making it a compile dependency saves end users from needing to include log4j
>> in their poms (or other dependency managers), but it feels... smelly? There
>> isn't actually a compile dependency, right?
>>
>> Josh
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, but the vast majority will use Log4J, and those enlightened
>>> enough to prefer Logback will also be enlightened enough to know the
>>> Maven pom incantation to include logback and exclude log4j.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Josh Canfield <jo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Agreed. I'm moving to logback and have to exclude log4j.
>>>> On Jan 18, 2011 7:32 AM, "Massimo Lusetti" <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Why there's a log4j dep? ... Maybe I'm in the 0.00001% of applications
>>>>> (who) will need to override this dependency to not use Log4J but why
>>>>> using slf4j then "force" a log implementation?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> --
>>>>> Massimo
>>>>> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>>>
>>> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>>>
>>> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
>>> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>>>
>>> (971) 678-5210
>>> http://howardlewisship.com
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why log4j as a compile dep?
Posted by Josh Canfield <jo...@gmail.com>.
I'm also running into two other compile dependencies in Hibernate-core:
org.hibernate:hibernate-core:3.6.0.Final [compile,master,runtime]
org.hibernate:hibernate-c3p0:3.6.0.Final [compile,master,runtime]
These were mentioned previously in the list, but I just got bit by them. We
shouldn't be depending on anything from the latest and greatest version of
hibernate, and I'm not sure why c3p0 is included at all.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Kalle Korhonen <kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Fully agree. Log4j should be in provided scope, or removed if it's not
> needed in the core at all. Adding it directly to the archetype pom
> makes sense.
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Robert Zeigler
> <ro...@roxanemy.com> wrote:
> > Not a compile dependency, that I'm aware of. How many users start with
> the quickstart as a basis for new projects? If that's a large percentage,
> couldn't we move the log4j dependency declaration into the generated pom?
> Then it's even easier to change for people who want to change it, and
> removes the fishy dependency in tapestry-core. Making that change now would
> need a definite note in upgrade notes so that log4j users who were relying
> on the tapestry-supplied dependency would know to tweak their pom to add
> their own dep.
> >
> > Robert
> >
> > On Jan 18, 2011, at 1/1812:15 PM , Josh Canfield wrote:
> >
> >> :) I'm also moving to gradle so it's a different kind of magic.
> >>
> >> compile("org.apache.tapestry:tapestry-core:$tapestryVersion") {
> >> exclude module: 'slf4j-log4j12'
> >> exclude module: 'log4j'
> >> }
> >>
> >> Making it a compile dependency saves end users from needing to include
> log4j
> >> in their poms (or other dependency managers), but it feels... smelly?
> There
> >> isn't actually a compile dependency, right?
> >>
> >> Josh
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes, but the vast majority will use Log4J, and those enlightened
> >>> enough to prefer Logback will also be enlightened enough to know the
> >>> Maven pom incantation to include logback and exclude log4j.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Josh Canfield <joshcanfield@gmail.com
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Agreed. I'm moving to logback and have to exclude log4j.
> >>>> On Jan 18, 2011 7:32 AM, "Massimo Lusetti" <ml...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Why there's a log4j dep? ... Maybe I'm in the 0.00001% of
> applications
> >>>>> (who) will need to override this dependency to not use Log4J but why
> >>>>> using slf4j then "force" a log implementation?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Massimo
> >>>>> http://meridio.blogspot.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> >>>
> >>> Creator of Apache Tapestry
> >>>
> >>> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
> >>> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
> >>>
> >>> (971) 678-5210
> >>> http://howardlewisship.com
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: Why log4j as a compile dep?
Posted by Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>.
Fully agree. Log4j should be in provided scope, or removed if it's not
needed in the core at all. Adding it directly to the archetype pom
makes sense.
Kalle
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Robert Zeigler
<ro...@roxanemy.com> wrote:
> Not a compile dependency, that I'm aware of. How many users start with the quickstart as a basis for new projects? If that's a large percentage, couldn't we move the log4j dependency declaration into the generated pom? Then it's even easier to change for people who want to change it, and removes the fishy dependency in tapestry-core. Making that change now would need a definite note in upgrade notes so that log4j users who were relying on the tapestry-supplied dependency would know to tweak their pom to add their own dep.
>
> Robert
>
> On Jan 18, 2011, at 1/1812:15 PM , Josh Canfield wrote:
>
>> :) I'm also moving to gradle so it's a different kind of magic.
>>
>> compile("org.apache.tapestry:tapestry-core:$tapestryVersion") {
>> exclude module: 'slf4j-log4j12'
>> exclude module: 'log4j'
>> }
>>
>> Making it a compile dependency saves end users from needing to include log4j
>> in their poms (or other dependency managers), but it feels... smelly? There
>> isn't actually a compile dependency, right?
>>
>> Josh
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, but the vast majority will use Log4J, and those enlightened
>>> enough to prefer Logback will also be enlightened enough to know the
>>> Maven pom incantation to include logback and exclude log4j.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Josh Canfield <jo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Agreed. I'm moving to logback and have to exclude log4j.
>>>> On Jan 18, 2011 7:32 AM, "Massimo Lusetti" <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Why there's a log4j dep? ... Maybe I'm in the 0.00001% of applications
>>>>> (who) will need to override this dependency to not use Log4J but why
>>>>> using slf4j then "force" a log implementation?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> --
>>>>> Massimo
>>>>> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>>>
>>> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>>>
>>> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
>>> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>>>
>>> (971) 678-5210
>>> http://howardlewisship.com
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why log4j as a compile dep?
Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Robert Zeigler
<ro...@roxanemy.com> wrote:
> Not a compile dependency, that I'm aware of. How many users start with the quickstart as a basis for new projects? If that's a large percentage, couldn't we move the log4j dependency declaration into the generated pom? Then it's even easier to change for people who want to change it, and removes the fishy dependency in tapestry-core. Making that change now would need a definite note in upgrade notes so that log4j users who were relying on the tapestry-supplied dependency would know to tweak their pom to add their own dep.
That would be pretty nice.
Cheers
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why log4j as a compile dep?
Posted by Robert Zeigler <ro...@roxanemy.com>.
Not a compile dependency, that I'm aware of. How many users start with the quickstart as a basis for new projects? If that's a large percentage, couldn't we move the log4j dependency declaration into the generated pom? Then it's even easier to change for people who want to change it, and removes the fishy dependency in tapestry-core. Making that change now would need a definite note in upgrade notes so that log4j users who were relying on the tapestry-supplied dependency would know to tweak their pom to add their own dep.
Robert
On Jan 18, 2011, at 1/1812:15 PM , Josh Canfield wrote:
> :) I'm also moving to gradle so it's a different kind of magic.
>
> compile("org.apache.tapestry:tapestry-core:$tapestryVersion") {
> exclude module: 'slf4j-log4j12'
> exclude module: 'log4j'
> }
>
> Making it a compile dependency saves end users from needing to include log4j
> in their poms (or other dependency managers), but it feels... smelly? There
> isn't actually a compile dependency, right?
>
> Josh
>
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, but the vast majority will use Log4J, and those enlightened
>> enough to prefer Logback will also be enlightened enough to know the
>> Maven pom incantation to include logback and exclude log4j.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Josh Canfield <jo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Agreed. I'm moving to logback and have to exclude log4j.
>>> On Jan 18, 2011 7:32 AM, "Massimo Lusetti" <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Why there's a log4j dep? ... Maybe I'm in the 0.00001% of applications
>>>> (who) will need to override this dependency to not use Log4J but why
>>>> using slf4j then "force" a log implementation?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> --
>>>> Massimo
>>>> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>>
>> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>>
>> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
>> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>>
>> (971) 678-5210
>> http://howardlewisship.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why log4j as a compile dep?
Posted by Josh Canfield <jo...@gmail.com>.
:) I'm also moving to gradle so it's a different kind of magic.
compile("org.apache.tapestry:tapestry-core:$tapestryVersion") {
exclude module: 'slf4j-log4j12'
exclude module: 'log4j'
}
Making it a compile dependency saves end users from needing to include log4j
in their poms (or other dependency managers), but it feels... smelly? There
isn't actually a compile dependency, right?
Josh
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, but the vast majority will use Log4J, and those enlightened
> enough to prefer Logback will also be enlightened enough to know the
> Maven pom incantation to include logback and exclude log4j.
>
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Josh Canfield <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Agreed. I'm moving to logback and have to exclude log4j.
> > On Jan 18, 2011 7:32 AM, "Massimo Lusetti" <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Why there's a log4j dep? ... Maybe I'm in the 0.00001% of applications
> >> (who) will need to override this dependency to not use Log4J but why
> >> using slf4j then "force" a log implementation?
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> --
> >> Massimo
> >> http://meridio.blogspot.com
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>
> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>
> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>
> (971) 678-5210
> http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: Why log4j as a compile dep?
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
Yes, but the vast majority will use Log4J, and those enlightened
enough to prefer Logback will also be enlightened enough to know the
Maven pom incantation to include logback and exclude log4j.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Josh Canfield <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Agreed. I'm moving to logback and have to exclude log4j.
> On Jan 18, 2011 7:32 AM, "Massimo Lusetti" <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why there's a log4j dep? ... Maybe I'm in the 0.00001% of applications
>> (who) will need to override this dependency to not use Log4J but why
>> using slf4j then "force" a log implementation?
>>
>> Cheers
>> --
>> Massimo
>> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why log4j as a compile dep?
Posted by Josh Canfield <jo...@gmail.com>.
Agreed. I'm moving to logback and have to exclude log4j.
On Jan 18, 2011 7:32 AM, "Massimo Lusetti" <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why there's a log4j dep? ... Maybe I'm in the 0.00001% of applications
> (who) will need to override this dependency to not use Log4J but why
> using slf4j then "force" a log implementation?
>
> Cheers
> --
> Massimo
> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>