[slf4j-dev] jcl-over-slf4j module not building

[Eric Crahen]

What is wrong with using the sun class in the interim?

On 2/19/07, Jacob Kjome <hoju at visi.com> wrote:
>
> At 04:27 PM 2/19/2007, you wrote:
> >On 2/19/07, Jacob Kjome <<mailto:hoju at visi.com>hoju at visi.com> wrote:
> >
> >BTW, if SLF4J used the Service API, I think it would have to be a home
> grown
> >one.  Clearly SLF4J cannot depend on com.sun.* or JDK1.6.  So, the
> Service
> >stuff would have to be written from scratch and shipped with the
> >API.  I'm not
> >sure how involved this would be as I'm not sure how much plumbing code
> would
> >need to be written.  Eric, can you address this point?
> >
> >
> >The common practice is use to the sun.misc.* version to get going
> >quickly. Although this is a sun.misc.* class, its actually pretty
> >stable, and they (Sun) do a decent job of keeping it compatible
> >since a lot of people use it - like the Base64Encoder class. If you
> >want to garuntee the solution still works on non-Sun JVMs, or you
> >are just generally more comfortable not using using the sun.misc.*
> >classes, it is fairly trivial to start with the sun.misc.* one for
> >now; and drop in a replacement that we write. Its not too difficult
> >to make up your own - its really a pretty simple class.
>
> I'm quite sure that depending on com.sun.* is not an option for an
> open source project.  I'd never allow it for Log4j and I can't
> imagine the SLF4J developers would allow it.  I suggest that you come
> up with an implementation of the service API for proposed inclusion
> in SLF4J.  There's no guarantee it would be accepted.  In fact, the
> odds seem against it.  However, I highly doubt the SLF4J developers
> are going to take the time to write it.  So, the only way this has a
> chance of moving forward is for someone to write it and propose it as
> SLF4J's non-JDK-specific Services implementation.  Not just
> pseudo-code, but actual fully implemented working code.
>
> Jake
>
>
>
> >--
> >
> >- Eric
> >_______________________________________________
> >dev mailing list
> >dev at slf4j.org
> >http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at slf4j.org
> http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>



-- 

- Eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://qos.ch/pipermail/slf4j-dev/attachments/20070219/0d1069c1/attachment.htm>