Hello gentlemen, I've been very happy to discover SLF4J. Log4j has long needed a rework. SLF4J is a fresh wind :) It can blow Log4J out of the water. If it goes MIT me thinks. Ceki> Do we want Big Iron (insert your least favorite IT company here) Ceki> to legally pirate an open source project, say logback? As SLF4J gains popularity it will likely be perceived as same in kind to Log4J. However Big Co-s will rather "pirate" the conveniently licensed alternative. I don't see how Log4J can be replaced this way. IMO Logback needs MIT/ASL. cheers, Anton P.S. "cross-posting" to my blog :) http://atagunov.blogspot.com/2008/05/slf4j-beyond-log4j.html
Hi Anton, Have you noticed that SLF4J is licensed under an MIT license? Also, given that logback-classic natively implements the SLF4J API, client code usually only comes into contact with SLF4J. Does that go to alleviate your concerns about logback's license, namely LGPL? Anton Tagunov wrote:
Hello gentlemen,
I've been very happy to discover SLF4J. Log4j has long needed a rework. SLF4J is a fresh wind :)
It can blow Log4J out of the water. If it goes MIT me thinks.
Ceki> Do we want Big Iron (insert your least favorite IT company here) Ceki> to legally pirate an open source project, say logback?
As SLF4J gains popularity it will likely be perceived as same in kind to Log4J.
However Big Co-s will rather "pirate" the conveniently licensed alternative.
I don't see how Log4J can be replaced this way. IMO Logback needs MIT/ASL.
cheers, Anton
P.S. "cross-posting" to my blog :) http://atagunov.blogspot.com/2008/05/slf4j-beyond-log4j.html
Hello Ceki, I'm glad to receive your reply. Ceki> Have you noticed that SLF4J is licensed under an MIT license? Yes, definitely. Ceki> Also, given that logback-classic natively implements the SLF4J API, Ceki> client code usually only comes into contact with SLF4J. Yes, I have fully appreciated this fact before posting to the list/blog. Ceki> Does that go to alleviate your concerns about logback's license, namely LGPL? On one account I understand that a commercial company can create derived work even from GPL works as long as the result is used only for its internal needs and distributed. From the aspect I'm okay even with GPL. But on the other account and this is why I have posted I see SLF4J as much better looking candidate for universal logging solution then Log4J. And I wish to see the vast majority of Java projects moving on and stardardising on it. This is partially selfish. As a developer I want world to settle on one tool, so that I would have less to learn. But I also want the world to standardize on the best tool. And this is where my concerns chime in. I'm really really concerned that to beat Log4J SLF4J/Logback need to beat it on all fronts. Including the license. That was the essense of my opinion: SLF4J/Logback are great and deserve to win. In order to win they need to win the hearts of Big Co-s to. And to do so they need MIT/ASL. with best regards, Anton Tagunov
Ceki> Does that go to alleviate your concerns about logback's license, namely LGPL? Anton> On one account I understand that a commercial company Anton> can create derived work even from GPL works as long as Anton> the result is used only for its internal needs Anton> and distributed. From the aspect I'm okay even with GPL. Correction: I meant and NOT distributed. This is a typical case for where I work at.
Anton Tagunov wrote: Anton> On one account I understand that a commercial company Anton> can create derived work even from GPL works as long as Anton> the result is used only for its internal needs Anton> and distributed. From the aspect I'm okay even with GPL. Anton> Correction: I meant and NOT distributed. Anton> This is a typical case for where I work at. True. I might add that relatively few people know that GPL is non-viral when the hosting software (using GPLed code) is used only internally and NOT distributed. Anton> And this is where my concerns chime in. I'm really really Anton> concerned that to beat Log4J SLF4J/Logback need to beat it Anton> on all fronts. Including the license. Anton> That was the essence of my opinion: SLF4J/Logback are great and Anton> deserve to win. In order to win they need to win the hearts of Big Anton> Co-s to. And to do so they need MIT/ASL. The various open-source licenses have their pros and cons. I agree with you that LGPL might hinder adoption within the ASF and beyond. As a counter-example, one could mention Hibernate which totally dominates the ORM market. More to the point, Java 7 is distributed under GPL+"classpath exception". When it is officially released and users start to adopt it in very large numbers, then whatever opposition against GPL/LGPL is likely to wither away. As for loggback's license, we have no irrepressible urge to dominate the "world of logging". If we do, that would be cool, if we don't, we don't. Nevertheless, your arguments make sense, and logback's license may be changed depending on how the future unfolds.
participants (2)
-
Anton Tagunov -
Ceki Gulcu