Log4j 2 vs. Commons Logging

I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized messages
or markers; that's a pretty big feature at this point.

Post by Gary Gregory
Hi All,
I'd like to say that Log4j 2 deprecates Apache Commons Logging, but it
feels like a stretch.
Thoughts?
Gary
--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Matt Sicker

2014-08-22 21:44:29 UTC

Have you asked this on the commons mailing list?

Post by Matt Sicker
I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized messages
or markers; that's a pretty big feature at this point.

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Gary Gregory

2014-08-22 23:08:41 UTC

I do not think it matters from the Commons POV. I am the Commons PMC Chair
FYI. Commons as a community can think and do what it wants with Commons
Logging. What I am more concerned about is if, we, the Log4j Community can
say with confidence "Log4j 2 is so good that we consider Commons Logging
obsolete because A, B and C".

Gary

Post by Matt Sicker
Have you asked this on the commons mailing list?

Post by Matt Sicker
I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized messages
or markers; that's a pretty big feature at this point.

Matt Sicker

2014-08-22 23:12:35 UTC

With SLF4J, JCL, and Log4j1 compatibility, I think we're far better than
JCL. I think we need a proper java.util.logger bridge as well to be a
complete replacement, though.

Post by Gary Gregory
I do not think it matters from the Commons POV. I am the Commons PMC Chair
FYI. Commons as a community can think and do what it wants with Commons
Logging. What I am more concerned about is if, we, the Log4j Community can
say with confidence "Log4j 2 is so good that we consider Commons Logging
obsolete because A, B and C".
Gary

Post by Matt Sicker
Have you asked this on the commons mailing list?

Post by Matt Sicker
I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized
messages or markers; that's a pretty big feature at this point.

--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Gary Gregory

2014-08-22 23:17:39 UTC

Post by Matt Sicker
With SLF4J, JCL, and Log4j1 compatibility, I think we're far better than
JCL. I think we need a proper java.util.logger bridge as well to be a
complete replacement, though.

I agree there, a bridge would round things out. For 2.1?

Gary

Post by Gary Gregory
I do not think it matters from the Commons POV. I am the Commons PMC
Chair FYI. Commons as a community can think and do what it wants with
Commons Logging. What I am more concerned about is if, we, the Log4j
Community can say with confidence "Log4j 2 is so good that we consider
Commons Logging obsolete because A, B and C".
Gary

Post by Matt Sicker
Have you asked this on the commons mailing list?

Post by Matt Sicker
I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized
messages or markers; that's a pretty big feature at this point.

Matt Sicker

2014-08-23 01:44:32 UTC

That was my goal at least with the work I did a little while back. Though
simplifying the requirements to making the user specify the correct system
property to choose Log4j2 does make that a whole lot easier.

Post by Matt Sicker
With SLF4J, JCL, and Log4j1 compatibility, I think we're far better than
JCL. I think we need a proper java.util.logger bridge as well to be a
complete replacement, though.

I agree there, a bridge would round things out. For 2.1?
Gary

Post by Gary Gregory
I do not think it matters from the Commons POV. I am the Commons PMC
Chair FYI. Commons as a community can think and do what it wants with
Commons Logging. What I am more concerned about is if, we, the Log4j
Community can say with confidence "Log4j 2 is so good that we consider
Commons Logging obsolete because A, B and C".
Gary

Post by Matt Sicker
Have you asked this on the commons mailing list?

Post by Matt Sicker
I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized
messages or markers; that's a pretty big feature at this point.

Post by Gary Gregory
Hi All,
I'd like to say that Log4j 2 deprecates Apache Commons Logging, but
it feels like a stretch.
Thoughts?
Gary
--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Remko Popma

2014-08-23 05:26:59 UTC

Could we set this property ourselves in the JUL bridge jar? So that just including this jar would set the system property? (Just thinking out loud...)

Sent from my iPhone

That was my goal at least with the work I did a little while back. Though simplifying the requirements to making the user specify the correct system property to choose Log4j2 does make that a whole lot easier.

With SLF4J, JCL, and Log4j1 compatibility, I think we're far better than JCL. I think we need a proper java.util.logger bridge as well to be a complete replacement, though.

I agree there, a bridge would round things out. For 2.1?
Gary

I do not think it matters from the Commons POV. I am the Commons PMC Chair FYI. Commons as a community can think and do what it wants with Commons Logging. What I am more concerned about is if, we, the Log4j Community can say with confidence "Log4j 2 is so good that we consider Commons Logging obsolete because A, B and C".
Gary

Post by Matt Sicker
Have you asked this on the commons mailing list?

I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized messages or markers; that's a pretty big feature at this point.

Post by Gary Gregory
Hi All,
I'd like to say that Log4j 2 deprecates Apache Commons Logging, but it feels like a stretch.
Thoughts?
Gary
--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition
Spring Batch in Action
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition
Spring Batch in Action
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Matt Sicker

2014-08-24 16:43:03 UTC

That would be a gamble on the classpath order of everything. The majority
of the work I did toward the bridge was working on a way to dynamically
inject Log4j into JUL to take over existing loggers and such. However, that
may be overly complicated. Just a bit.

Post by Remko Popma
Could we set this property ourselves in the JUL bridge jar? So that just
including this jar would set the system property? (Just thinking out
loud...)
Sent from my iPhone
That was my goal at least with the work I did a little while back. Though
simplifying the requirements to making the user specify the correct system
property to choose Log4j2 does make that a whole lot easier.

Post by Matt Sicker
With SLF4J, JCL, and Log4j1 compatibility, I think we're far better than
JCL. I think we need a proper java.util.logger bridge as well to be a
complete replacement, though.

I agree there, a bridge would round things out. For 2.1?
Gary

Post by Gary Gregory
I do not think it matters from the Commons POV. I am the Commons PMC
Chair FYI. Commons as a community can think and do what it wants with
Commons Logging. What I am more concerned about is if, we, the Log4j
Community can say with confidence "Log4j 2 is so good that we consider
Commons Logging obsolete because A, B and C".
Gary

Post by Matt Sicker
Have you asked this on the commons mailing list?

Post by Matt Sicker
I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized
messages or markers; that's a pretty big feature at this point.

Post by Gary Gregory
Hi All,
I'd like to say that Log4j 2 deprecates Apache Commons Logging, but
it feels like a stretch.
Thoughts?
Gary
--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Christian Grobmeier

2014-08-26 13:39:38 UTC

In my opinion its surely obsolete, but where is the point saying it?
Do you want to add a statement on the website?

Post by Matt Sicker
Have you asked this on the commons mailing list?

Post by Matt Sicker
I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized messages
or markers; that's a pretty big feature at this point.

Post by Gary Gregory
Hi All,
I'd like to say that Log4j 2 deprecates Apache Commons Logging, but it
feels like a stretch.
Thoughts?
Gary
--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition
Spring Batch in Action
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de

Gary Gregory

2014-08-26 13:43:13 UTC

I could see a statement to that effect making it in our FAQ once we have
true feature parity, specifically a bridge to JUL IIRC (without going
through Slf4j).

Gary

Post by Christian Grobmeier
In my opinion its surely obsolete, but where is the point saying it?
Do you want to add a statement on the website?

Post by Gary Gregory
I do not think it matters from the Commons POV. I am the Commons PMC

Chair

Post by Gary Gregory
FYI. Commons as a community can think and do what it wants with Commons
Logging. What I am more concerned about is if, we, the Log4j Community

can

Post by Gary Gregory
say with confidence "Log4j 2 is so good that we consider Commons Logging
obsolete because A, B and C".
Gary

Post by Matt Sicker
Have you asked this on the commons mailing list?

Post by Matt Sicker
I'd certainly say so. Commons Logging doesn't have parameterized

messages