[slf4j-user] Java 5 version of SLF4J?

[Christopher.White at bbh.com]

Ceki,

I do understand your reasoning, and thank you for your quick response.

And since Logback natively implements SLF4J, its API will also not be 
changed to include any new JSE 5 features, correct? Nor will new method 
signatures specific to just Logback be created for this (if I chose to use 
Logback without SLF4J)?

This is unfortunate for those who have been using JSE 5 for some time now, 
and still have not been able to fully take advantage of its features 
(especially when it comes to the work of tedious logging). 

I was really excited about SLF4J/Logback when this project started, but 
without these new features (which would simplify and reduce my coding 
effort) it just doesn't seem worth it to convert to this logging framework 
(even though I really appreciate the clean Logback implementation). 
Perhaps Log4J 2.0 will incorporate these considerations since it will be 
JSE 5 dependent. If it does, I'd have to bet that many people will jump 
ship on SLF4J/Logback in favor of Log4J. It really is too bad that the 
Logback API cannot be changed before it reaches version 1.0.



-Chris




Ceki Gulcu <listid at qos.ch> 
Sent by: user-bounces at slf4j.org
04/24/2008 08:46 AM
Please respond to
User list for the slf4j project <user at slf4j.org>


To
User list for the slf4j project <user at slf4j.org>
cc

Subject
Re: [slf4j-user] Java 5 version of SLF4J?







Hello Christopher,

Users keep asking for varagrs [1]. However, as I stated at the time,
given that SLF4J is intended used by all sorts of libraries, the
dependency graph between libraries and SLF4J can be surprisingly
complex. In particular, it would not be unusual for the dependency
graph to have multiple dependencies on SLF4J with *different*
versions. Thus, we have to be extra-careful and conservative when
changing the SLF4J API.

I regret to disappoint our users but except for bug fixes, do not
expect any changes to the SLF4J API.

[1] http://www.slf4j.org/pipermail/user/2008-January/000468.html


Christopher.White at bbh.com wrote:
> 
> Has there been any more discussion lately about updating the API to 
> support varargs and perhaps printf?


-- 
Ceki Gülcü
QOS.ch is looking to hire talented developers in Switzerland.  If
interested, please contact c e k i AT q o s . c h

_______________________________________________
user mailing list
user at slf4j.org
http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user



*************************** IMPORTANT
NOTE***************************** The opinions expressed in this
message and/or any attachments are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., its
subsidiaries and affiliates ("BBH"). There is no guarantee that
this message is either private or confidential, and it may have
been altered by unauthorized sources without your or our knowledge.
Nothing in the message is capable or intended to create any legally
binding obligations on either party and it is not intended to
provide legal advice. BBH accepts no responsibility for loss or
damage from its use, including damage from virus.
************************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://qos.ch/pipermail/slf4j-user/attachments/20080424/e7ba7e86/attachment.htm>