Since the existing log4j-over-slf4j doesn't include the classes at all the caller could implement them, couldn't they? Just in a separate jar. ----- Original Message -----
From: "Nikolas Everett" <nik9000@gmail.com> To: "logback users list" <logback-user@qos.ch> Sent: Wednesday, 27 October, 2010 3:23:24 PM Subject: Re: [logback-user] Legacy Log4j Question On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Ceki Gulcu < ceki@qos.ch > wrote:
If you have a hard dependency on log4j that you can't change then I guess you have to use log4j.
I agree but may be the caller could be satisfied with NOP.
It should be possible to satisfy most callers except perhaps in certain cases which could become rather hard to diagnose due to the NOP trickery...
In that case it might be nice to let the caller implement the log4j functionality or at least allow it to be optionally included so the caller *can* implement it.
For what it is worth it I haven't ever had this problem.
--Nik _______________________________________________ Logback-user mailing list Logback-user@qos.ch http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user