>> Another option is to try to work with Ceki to address some of the >> concerns of the commons community with regards to using slf4j. >> >> * There is a hassle with too many jars for dependencies with slf4j. >> * Every time Ceki goes on vacation everything stops. >> * Some have a preference for Apache driven projects. >> * Figuring out the dependencies that are needed can be difficult. > > Another option would be to try to convince Ceki to move his project to > the ASF? He is an ASF member, right? What were his concerns about > the ASF that made him start his project elsewhere?
Ceki is an ASF member and even a Logging PMC. You can read most about his concerns on his blog, for example: http://ceki.blogspot.com/2010/05/forces-and-vulnerabilites-of-apache.html http://ceki.blogspot.com/2010/05/committocracy-as-alternative-for.html He seems to be very opposed to the ASF model; there was much bad feelings in the "log4j case" before I started with logging and therefore I doubt that Ceki is willing to go back to the ASF. At least his blogposts reflect that he is not satisfied with the "Apache Way" itself instead of personal trouble, which we might be able to solve. Ceki is reading this list, so maybe he wants to elaborate a bit more. The logback project is not satisfying me as a developer. I am at the ASF because I like the way it is. I like the software. And of course I like the way the work is done here and finally I like the license. logback/slf4j is going another way. It does not have the license, and holidays seem to be very important to the project. We, the ASF, have really good software in our repositories. We have very competent people around. Why do we discuss to move to slf4j/logback - now? The last time we discussed this there was less activity on logging. Now there is activity on the logging project at apache. There is Ralph and some other people doing lots of work for log4j2. We have learned there are some people who want commons-logging. We have learned in Tomcat are some people who created classloader workarounds and know about the case and could help with it. It feels wrong to me to move away to slf4j/logback with Commons at this point of time. We would kill the new growing dynamics of logging. Instead we should use the new interest and try to work together on the new log4j/commons-logging. Over at logging we welcome new fresh blood. After all, even log4j 1.2.x is not bad software. I use it daily; i have not missed the features of logback (parametrized messages, Markers etc.) so far. I put log4j in my class path, copy over one of my fave configuration, ready. No need to waste any more time to this. log4j is still good and at the moment I don't see a reason to move on. In the commons-logging case, if the commons-* projects stop using commons-logging, then commons-logging feels pretty dead. So my preference is: - Help Ralph to make log4j 2.0 become truth - Update commons-logging, make it work with log4j 2.0 - Try to make log4j 2.0 become compatible with slf4j If one of you is interested in helping with log4j, please subscribe to log4j-...@logging.apache.org Cheers Christian --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
