You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Al Maw <wi...@almaw.com> on 2007/06/05 17:38:10 UTC
slf4j-api dep
Hi folks,
I'm pretty sure our slf4j dependencies are very wrong.
I see the root pom.xml in trunk has a dependencies section that doesn't
actually include slf4j-api (it's only in the dependenciesManagement).
Instead, it includes slf4j-log4j12 and log4j, which surely isn't right?
Isn't the whole point of using slf4j so that we don't mandate a logging
framework choice? If we're going to force log4j bindings we may as well
use log4j everywhere.
I think we should be depending on sfl4j-api for the core projects and
that's it. The examples project or test scopes may well want bindings
for log4j.
Regards,
Al
--
Alastair Maw
Wicket-biased blog at http://herebebeasties.com
Re: slf4j-api dep
Posted by Al Maw <wi...@almaw.com>.
Done.
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
> Yeah, that sounds right.
>
> Eelco
>
> On 6/5/07, Al Maw <wi...@almaw.com> wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I'm pretty sure our slf4j dependencies are very wrong.
>>
>> I see the root pom.xml in trunk has a dependencies section that doesn't
>> actually include slf4j-api (it's only in the dependenciesManagement).
>>
>> Instead, it includes slf4j-log4j12 and log4j, which surely isn't right?
>> Isn't the whole point of using slf4j so that we don't mandate a logging
>> framework choice? If we're going to force log4j bindings we may as well
>> use log4j everywhere.
>>
>> I think we should be depending on sfl4j-api for the core projects and
>> that's it. The examples project or test scopes may well want bindings
>> for log4j.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Al
>>
>> --
>> Alastair Maw
>> Wicket-biased blog at http://herebebeasties.com
>>
>
> !DSPAM:46658514197911337720495!
>
Re: slf4j-api dep
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
Yeah, that sounds right.
Eelco
On 6/5/07, Al Maw <wi...@almaw.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm pretty sure our slf4j dependencies are very wrong.
>
> I see the root pom.xml in trunk has a dependencies section that doesn't
> actually include slf4j-api (it's only in the dependenciesManagement).
>
> Instead, it includes slf4j-log4j12 and log4j, which surely isn't right?
> Isn't the whole point of using slf4j so that we don't mandate a logging
> framework choice? If we're going to force log4j bindings we may as well
> use log4j everywhere.
>
> I think we should be depending on sfl4j-api for the core projects and
> that's it. The examples project or test scopes may well want bindings
> for log4j.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Al
>
> --
> Alastair Maw
> Wicket-biased blog at http://herebebeasties.com
>