Hi, +1 for JUL, it is the most portable and less intrusive solution since it is built-in, graalvm friendly (mvnd) and any backend compatible (slf4j, logback directly, log4j2, ...). It is always a pity for a solution which can embedded user code - mojo/extensions - to force a logging library IMHO since it is never the right one or the right version.
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le ven. 4 nov. 2022 à 12:12, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> a écrit : > And let's not forget that Log4j also is a facade API: > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/api-separation.html > > Gary > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2022, 06:56 Slawomir Jaranowski <s.jaranow...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I want to start ( again :-) ) a discussion about logging in Maven > plugins. > > > > First I agree that plugin developers should use logging methods provided > by > > Plugin api. > > > > But we can not expect plugin developers to write everything from scratch. > > In many cases they may want to use an external library to do tasks needed > > by the plugin. > > > > We don't have any control over what logging framework is used in the > > external library used by plugin developers. > > > > We also maintain some libraries which can be used by plugin and also as > > standalone in another project. > > In such a case the question is - what logging we should use [1]? > > > > Last time I did a test, I use Java util logging from JDK in the Maven > > plugin. > > I see that Java util logging use default configuration, eg. we will have > > two lines for one log event. > > Even more options -q and -X have no effect for such a logger. > > > > One of the solution for such problem is using "Bridging" methods > supported > > by slf4j [2] > > Probably all of existing and future logging frameworks can not be > covered - > > but most of common using will be. > > > > I hope that, even if we will want to change the logging framework used > > internally in Maven, we can also use the same method. > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-dependency-analyzer/pull/71 > > [2] https://www.slf4j.org/legacy.html > > > > > > -- > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > >
