May 2023 - slf4j-dev - mailman3.qos.ch

[JIRA] Updates for SLF4J-590: Provider artifacts still use "binding" in names and descriptions
by slf4j developers list 15 May '23

15 May '23

SLF4J / SLF4J-590 [Open] Provider artifacts still use "binding" in names and descriptions ============================== Here's what changed in this issue in the last few minutes. This issue has been created This issue is now assigned to you. View or comment on issue using this link https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-590 ============================== Issue created ------------------------------ Philippe Cloutier created this issue on 15/May/23 23:14 Summary: Provider artifacts still use "binding" in names and descriptions Issue Type: Improvement Assignee: SLF4J developers list Created: 15/May/23 23:14 Priority: Trivial Reporter: Philippe Cloutier Description: SLF4J now favors the term "provider" over "binding", as can be seen in [the manual's _Linking with a logging framework at deployment time_ section|https://www.slf4j.org/manual.html#swapping] Nevertheless, multiple SLF4J artifacts still use the term "binding" instead. For example, slf4j-log4j12 and slf4j-simple. The latter has the name "SLF4J Simple Binding". ============================== This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v9.6.0#960000-sha1:a3ee8af)

1 0

[JIRA] Updates for SLF4J-543: Improve slf4j binding diagram
by slf4j developers list 15 May '23

15 May '23

SLF4J / SLF4J-543 [Open] Improve slf4j binding diagram ============================== Here's what changed in this issue in the last few minutes. There is 1 comment. View or comment on issue using this link https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-543 ============================== 1 comment ------------------------------ Philippe Cloutier on 15/May/23 23:08 Indeed! It would also be good: * to put "unbound" next to "bound to no-operation" * to cover binding to Log4j 2 ============================== This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v9.6.0#960000-sha1:a3ee8af)

1 0

Announcing investment by the Sovereign Tech Fund
by slf4j developers list 12 May '23

12 May '23

Hello all, In addition to preexisting support from companies such as Google, Exolab and Spotify R&D, we are excited to announce a sustained and multi-year investment from the Sovereign Tech Fund (STF) for the maintenance and improvement of logback, SLF4J and reload4j projects [1]. In 2006, we founded the SLF4J and logback projects and continue to maintain them until this day. Cumulatively, the artifacts of these two projects are downloaded over 4 billion times per year. Given the sheer volume of users, maintaining the SLF4J and logback projects can be rather time consuming. In 2022, we started the reload4j project with the goal of fixing critical security issues in log4j 1.x. We wish to continue providing the most reliable, fast and flexible logging framework for Java developers and heartily thank the STF for choosing to invest in our projects. The Sovereign Tech Fund supports the development, improvement and maintenance of digital infrastructure. Their goal is to sustainably strengthen the open source ecosystem, with a focus on security, resilience, technological diversity, and the people behind the projects. As Cailean Osborne aptly put it [2]: “As one of the first governmental funds dedicated to OSS, the STF is spearheading a critical shift in how governments invest in the long-term viability of OSS and digital public goods." In our own experience, even the tiniest token of support counts. It goes without saying that a larger multi-year investment counts all the more. We would like to express our gratitude to the Sovereign Tech Fund for their support and for paving the way for this historical change. [1] https://tinyurl.com/stfLogback [2] https://tinyurl.com/stfCaileanOsborne -- Ceki Gülcü Sponsoring SLF4J/logback/reload4j at https://github.com/sponsors/qos-ch

1 0

[JIRA] Updates for SLF4J-589: User manual: unclear providers list in "Binding with a logging framework at deployment time"
by slf4j developers list 04 May '23

04 May '23

SLF4J / SLF4J-589 [Resolved] User manual: unclear providers list in "Binding with a logging framework at deployment time" ============================== Here's what changed in this issue in the last few minutes. There are 2 updates, 1 comment. View or comment on issue using this link https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-589 ============================== 2 updates ------------------------------ Changes by Ceki Gülcü on 04/May/23 23:00 Resolution: Fixed Status: Resolved (was: Open) ============================== 1 comment ------------------------------ Ceki Gülcü on 04/May/23 23:00 [~Chealer] Thank you for this report. The list is now mentioned as partial and non exhaustive. The title of the section now refers to "linking" instead of "binding" ============================== This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v9.6.0#960000-sha1:a3ee8af)

1 0

[JIRA] Updates for SLF4J-589: User manual: unclear providers list in "Binding with a logging framework at deployment time"
by slf4j developers list 04 May '23

04 May '23

SLF4J / SLF4J-589 [Open] User manual: unclear providers list in "Binding with a logging framework at deployment time" ============================== Here's what changed in this issue in the last few minutes. This issue has been created This issue is now assigned to you. View or comment on issue using this link https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-589 ============================== Issue created ------------------------------ Philippe Cloutier created this issue on 04/May/23 22:04 Summary: User manual: unclear providers list in "Binding with a logging framework at deployment time" Issue Type: Improvement Assignee: SLF4J developers list Created: 04/May/23 22:04 Priority: Minor Reporter: Philippe Cloutier Severity: normal Description: [The _Binding with a logging framework at deployment time_ section of the user manual|https://www.slf4j.org/manual.html#swapping] contains right after the first paragraph a list of ~7 providers. Unfortunately, there is no description of that list. It is unclear whether it contains a list of all providers, or just a list of some providers. It would prevent confusion to indicate which providers are listed. The current situation makes it likely readers will interpret the list as a full list of providers. If I understand correctly, this would be very problematic, as the list in fact omits major providers including those for Log4j version 2 (mainly log4j-slf4j2-impl). P.S. That section still uses the deprecated term "bindings". ============================== This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v9.6.0#960000-sha1:a3ee8af)

1 0

[JIRA] Updates for SLF4J-588: User manual: Refers to [Apache] Commons Logging as "Jakarta Commons Logging"
by slf4j developers list 02 May '23

02 May '23

SLF4J / SLF4J-588 [Resolved] User manual: Refers to [Apache] Commons Logging as "Jakarta Commons Logging" ============================== Here's what changed in this issue in the last few minutes. There are 2 updates. View or comment on issue using this link https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-588 ============================== 2 updates ------------------------------ Changes by Ceki Gülcü on 02/May/23 22:19 Resolution: Fixed Status: Resolved (was: Open) ============================== This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v9.6.0#960000-sha1:a3ee8af)

1 0

[JIRA] Updates for SLF4J-588: User manual: Refers to [Apache] Commons Logging as "Jakarta Commons Logging"
by slf4j developers list 02 May '23

02 May '23

SLF4J / SLF4J-588 [Open] User manual: Refers to [Apache] Commons Logging as "Jakarta Commons Logging" ============================== Here's what changed in this issue in the last few minutes. There is 1 comment. View or comment on issue using this link https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-588 ============================== 1 comment ------------------------------ Ceki Gülcü on 02/May/23 20:31 [~Chealer] Thank your for this report. Given that it changing the module names would impact users, the JCL acronym is still in use. However, the documentation now mentions Apache Commons Logging as an alias for Jakarta Commons Logging. As for the missing "a", I could not find its location. ============================== This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v9.6.0#960000-sha1:a3ee8af)

1 0

[JIRA] Updates for SLF4J-588: User manual: Refers to [Apache] Commons Logging as "Jakarta Commons Logging"
by slf4j developers list 02 May '23

02 May '23

SLF4J / SLF4J-588 [Open] User manual: Refers to [Apache] Commons Logging as "Jakarta Commons Logging" ============================== Here's what changed in this issue in the last few minutes. This issue has been created This issue is now assigned to you. View or comment on issue using this link https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-588 ============================== Issue created ------------------------------ Philippe Cloutier created this issue on 02/May/23 18:00 Summary: User manual: Refers to [Apache] Commons Logging as "Jakarta Commons Logging" Issue Type: Bug Assignee: SLF4J developers list Created: 02/May/23 18:00 Priority: Trivial Reporter: Philippe Cloutier Description: The user manual refers to [Commons-logging|https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-logging/] twice in [its Binding with a logging framework at deployment time section|https://www.slf4j.org/manual.html#swapping] most importantly in its description of slf4j-jcl-2.0.7.jar: ??Binding/provider for Jakarta Commons Logging. This binding will delegate all SLF4J logging to JCL.?? While calling Commons Logging "Jakarta Commons Logging" may not be incorrect, it would be much better to call it "Apache Commons Logging", since [it was renamed|https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=589168] more than 13 years ago. Note that despite this rename, the previous acronym "JCL" is strangely still used, so I would suggest to keep mentioning "Jakarta Commons Logging" or at least keep the acronym. ============================== This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v9.6.0#960000-sha1:a3ee8af)

1 0

[JIRA] Updates for SLF4J-587: Website: Misleading reference to user manual
by slf4j developers list 02 May '23

02 May '23

SLF4J / SLF4J-587 [Resolved] Website: Misleading reference to user manual ============================== Here's what changed in this issue in the last few minutes. There are 2 updates, 1 comment. View or comment on issue using this link https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-587 ============================== 2 updates ------------------------------ Changes by Ceki Gülcü on 02/May/23 17:57 Resolution: Fixed Status: Resolved (was: Open) ============================== 1 comment ------------------------------ Ceki Gülcü on 02/May/23 17:58 [~Chealer] Thank you for your remarks. The changes were made according your suggestions. ============================== This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v9.6.0#960000-sha1:a3ee8af)

1 0

[JIRA] Updates for SLF4J-587: Website: Misleading reference to user manual
by slf4j developers list 02 May '23

02 May '23

SLF4J / SLF4J-587 [Open] Website: Misleading reference to user manual ============================== Here's what changed in this issue in the last few minutes. This issue has been created This issue is now assigned to you. View or comment on issue using this link https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-587 ============================== Issue created ------------------------------ Philippe Cloutier created this issue on 02/May/23 17:40 Summary: Website: Misleading reference to user manual Issue Type: Bug Assignee: SLF4J developers list Created: 02/May/23 17:40 Priority: Trivial Reporter: Philippe Cloutier Severity: trivial Description: The second paragraph of [the homepage|https://www.slf4j.org/] reads: ??Before you start using SLF4J, we highly recommend that you read the two-page SLF4J user manual.?? The "two-page" qualifier convinced me to follow the recommendation and go to [the user manual|https://www.slf4j.org/manual.html] But halfway through reading it, I realized it was much longer than I had expected. In my browser, on a monitor much bigger than average with the viewport occupying 2560x1674 pixels, at default zoom, the user manual's content is more than 7-page-long. While there may exist a screen which fits that manual in less than 3 pages, I assume the addition of content like _Salient historical changes_ and - more importantly - the _Fluent Logging API_ section has made the paragraph outdated, to the point of being misleading at this point. The user manual remains definitely useful and suggesting it remains a good idea, but the paragraph should be improved. I suggest: # to drop the "two-page" qualifier or replace it with something vaguer like "concise" # to clarify what is meant by "Before you start using SLF4J". Perhaps replace with "Before you adopt SLF4J" # perhaps just "recommend" reading rather than "highly recommend" it ============================== This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v9.6.0#960000-sha1:a3ee8af)

1 0