[slf4j-user] user Digest, Vol 26, Issue 1

[Thomas.TH.Hamacher at partner.bmw.ch]

> Hello Thomas,
>
> I agree with you that the existence of the FATAL level would make it easier for users to migrate to SLF4J from > log4j or from commons-logging.
>
> It was not clear to me how the FATAL level helped you. What do you mean by "errors, that are logged  as FATAL > > are connected to the log4j" ?
>
> Cheers,

Hi Ceki,

Sure! So here are some more words to clarify, what I meant!
Currently we defined the differences between FATAL and ERROR just in the way we handle it regarding the notification of users/developers.
We configured the log4j that any FATAL error should be immediately reported to the developers through an email. It does not necessarily terminate the application (because this is, what we still want to decide on our own), but we have to know about these errrors instantly!
ERRORs are simply logged into a log-file. So this is still an unwanted malfunction in the application (so no WARN), but does not required immediate notification and it is sufficient to see these errors in a daily scan of the log-files.

Maybe this makes my distinction a bit clearer.

HTH

Thomas