Log4j is also a logging API besides an implementation with numerous advantages to SLF4J. By codifying SLF4J in the standard, I feel that this unnecessarily limits the log service API.
On 7 April 2017 at 04:58, Neil Bartlett <[email protected]> wrote: > The draft specification repeatedly mentions SLF4J and supports it > explicitly. Log4j is an implementation that can be used behind SLF4J. > > So… what’s missing? > > On 6 Apr 2017, at 22:25, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm honestly surprised that there was no collaboration between SLF4J or > Log4j about this considering most implementations of the service will end > up delegating to Log4j2 or Logback most likely (see pax-logging for > example). > > On 6 April 2017 at 13:58, BJ Hargrave <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It is indeed a service. The spec writing for these changes are not in the >> draft spec so you can see https://github.com/osgi/design >> /blob/master/rfcs/rfc0219/rfc-0219-LogService-Update.pdf for some more >> detail/background on the change. >> >> >> Also see https://github.com/osgi/slf4j-osgi which holds an slf4j binding >> to the new Log Service. >> -- >> >> BJ Hargrave >> Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM // office: +1 386 848 1781 >> <(386)%20848-1781> >> OSGi Fellow and CTO of the OSGi Alliance // mobile: +1 386 848 3788 >> <(386)%20848-3788> >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> ----- Original message ----- >> From: Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >> Sent by: [email protected] >> To: OSGi Developer Mail List <[email protected]> >> Cc: >> Subject: Re: [osgi-dev] Log Service Specification Version 1.4 doubt >> Date: Thu, Apr 6, 2017 2:11 PM >> >> As long as LoggerFactory is a service and not a static singleton like in >> SLF4J and Log4j2, then the API makes sense in an OSGi context. If it's yet >> another static factory, then I'd promote the use of Log4j2 instead as we >> don't need yet another logging facade. >> >> On 6 April 2017 at 12:27, Cristiano Gavião <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> I was reading today the early draft of compendium 7.0.0. >> >> I saw two interfaces that caught my attention: LoggerFactory and Logger. >> >> could someone explain me the idea behind them? why not >> importing/extending interfaces from org.slf4j.api instead? >> >> If I understood it right, LoggerFactory is aimed to be used as a >> service, but I wondering, it would be possible to obtain a Logger from >> the factory statically as well as we do when using sfl4j/logback on >> non-service classes? >> >> thanks, >> >> Cristiano >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSGi Developer Mail List >> [email protected] >> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSGi Developer Mail List >> [email protected] >> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSGi Developer Mail List >> [email protected] >> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > _______________________________________________ > OSGi Developer Mail List > [email protected] > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > OSGi Developer Mail List > [email protected] > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
