Tison, Il giorno mar 21 giu 2022 alle ore 12:44 tison <wander4...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > Hi devs, > > I learn that PulsarAdminImpl has a static block requires classpath contains > exact either of > > * slf4j-jdk14 > * jul-to-slf4j > > I'm curious what logging framework Pulsar choose among the codebase.
AKAIF we are using only SLF4J in Pulsar codebase. maybe jul-to-slf4j is there only for historical reasons ideally jul-to-slf4j is only something you should care about only during packaging, for runtime (or you can add it also for with test scope) we could try to remove it for the next major release (2.11) Would you like to do some trials ? Enrico > Basically we should > depend on either jul facade or slf4j facade, and leave the class loading > issue to users who > include libraries depending on other logging framework. > > Current logic causes an issue that if user doesn't depend on both > slf4j-jdk14 and jul-to-slf4j, > PulsarAdminImpl will panic because it requires exact one of these two deps > in the classpath. > And thus user should add one of them (basically jul-to-slf4j) even if they > don't depend on it > effectively. > > Best, > tison.
