Re: scalax.logging

> On 2008-05-26 20:36:52 Andrew Foggin wrote:
>  
>> I'm just catching up on a big backlog.  Is adding a dependency on
>> slf4j (or anything else outside core Java and Scala libraries)
>> desirable?  I'm not sure that it is.
>>    
>
> I think that we certainly want to keep dependencies to a minimum. We
> definitely should depend only on mature and well-known libraries. We
> also need to ensure that (runtime) dependencies do not have licenses
> more strict that our own. But I think that to avoid dependencies
> completely is counter to the overall goal of being useful.
>
>  
>> Personally I'm not keen on the proliferation of logging apis.  
>> commons-logging is a pet hate of mine - although I haven't looked at
>> slf4j I'm assuming the intent is the same.
>>    
>
> Pretty much. Essentially our problems are:
> - We are going to want to do logging within Scalax
> - Logging is exactly the sort of common need that Scalax seeks to
> address.
> - Writing yet another logging API just to avoid a dependency stinks.
>
> Thanks to the utter incompetence of the JSR47 group, that avenue is not
> an option. SLF4J is the successor to Log4j, and seems to be the best of
> a bad bunch (more specifically, the combination of SLF4J with Logback
> is the successor to Log4j, but SLF4J also supports other backends).
>
> /J
>
>
>