13 May
2009
13 May
'09
5:49 p.m.
On May 13, 2009, at 5:39 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On May 13, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
> Vincent Massol wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wanted to see if we could move our LogEnabled lifecycle phase to a
>> Logging component. I think it's not going to work since this means
>> injecting a LoggingFactory/LoggingManager component and you need to
>> call getLogger(this.getClass()) to get access to the Logger which is
>> awkward.
>>
>> What I propose:
>>
>> 1) Use SLF4J (drop the slf4j-log4j jar in our WEB-INF/lib so that
>> SLF4J uses log4j by default)
>> 2) Drop the JCL/JUL/LOG4j SLF4J legacy jars in our WEB-INF/lib too
>> and exclude the JCL/JUL/LOG4J jars from our poms so that all third
>> party logs go to our logging system
>> 3) Non component code should use a SLF4J's LoggerFactory directly
>>
>> 4a) Keep LogEnabled and AbstractLogEnabled for our components
>> or
>> 4b) Automatically inject a Logger and a ComponentManager when there
>> are fields with these types in a component class.
>>
>> I like 4b) for its simplicity but I'm worried by the "magical"
>> aspect
>> of it.
Note that if we wanted to remove the magical aspect of it we could
simply add a @LogEnabled and @Composable annotations and the class
fields would only be injected if those annotations are found. But
maybe it's not even necessary.
-Vincent
But... Why do
we need 4 at all?
You mean use a static and don't do IOC?
I don't like it it has all the problems of static.
-Vincent