On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 02:00:13 +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
For such a simple case like logging in a (math) library you can also
use
the JDK jul logging.
This may make you change your mind:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11359187/why-not-use-java-util-logging
However I really do not see a need for it
Examples were given in this thread.
(and I
think it can negatively impact the user experience of a lib if it
does
logging even when it has no environmental interactions)
Could you elaborate on "negatively impact"? Thanks.
Am Sat, 26 Sep
2015 01:47:09 +0200 schrieb Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>:
Thanks for the reminder; in that document, we read:
(1) Scope of the Package
[...]
5. Limited dependencies. No external dependencies beyond Commons
components and the JDK
So we are fine if use "Log4j 2" as kindly offered by Gary.
My long-standing mentioning of slf4j was only because of its
"weightlessness" (thanks to the no-op implementation of its API).
If "Log4j 2" has followed this path, good for everyone.
No objection, then?
Uh, be carefull with the trigger of that gun you point at somenes
chest :)
Sure. :-D
Regards,
Gilles
Gruss
Bernd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
