[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CTAKES-557?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17653349#comment-17653349
]
Sean Finan commented on CTAKES-557:
-----------------------------------
I thought about that, and it definitely isn't a bad idea. Personally I don't
have any leanings one way or another when it comes to a logging framework,
facade, service, etc. Except cout ...
As far as I know moving to either log4j v2 or slf4j requires a little
find&replace refactoring in ctakes code, which isn't so bad. The only thing
that gives me pause is some custom Appender as I mention above. It would make
sense for slf4j to have an equivalent interface, I just haven't looked into it.
I am pretty sure that we would still need to distribute with log4j v2 and the
log4j v1-v2 bridge to keep safe all older dependencies that use the log4j v1
api.
> remove log4jv1 dependency
> -------------------------
>
> Key: CTAKES-557
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CTAKES-557
> Project: cTAKES
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: PJ Fanning
> Priority: Major
>
> Log4jv1 has been EndOfLife for many years and has a number of unfixed
> security issues. Could you use log4jv2 instead?
>
> https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/ctakes/ctakes-core/4.0.0.1/ctakes-core-4.0.0.1.pom
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
