[logback-user] Legacy Log4j Question

Robert Elliot rob at lidalia.org.uk
Wed Oct 27 16:48:31 CEST 2010

Since the existing log4j-over-slf4j doesn't include the classes at all the caller could implement them, couldn't they?  Just in a separate jar.

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nikolas Everett" <nik9000 at gmail.com>
> To: "logback users list" <logback-user at qos.ch>
> Sent: Wednesday, 27 October, 2010 3:23:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [logback-user] Legacy Log4j Question
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Ceki Gulcu < ceki at qos.ch > wrote:
> > If you have a hard dependency on log4j that you can't change then I
> > guess you have to use log4j.
> I agree but may be the caller could be satisfied with NOP.
> It should be possible to satisfy most callers except perhaps in
> certain cases which could become rather hard to diagnose due to the
> NOP trickery...
> In that case it might be nice to let the caller implement the log4j
> functionality or at least allow it to be optionally included so the
> caller *can* implement it.
> For what it is worth it I haven't ever had this problem.
> --Nik
> _______________________________________________
> Logback-user mailing list
> Logback-user at qos.ch
> http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user

More information about the Logback-user mailing list