Re: [slf4j-dev] Release of SLF4J version 1.6.0-RC0

I've just taken a look at your code and I think it's quite neat. I've implemented it the other way around (i.e. a log-methods that receive a dumb Level enum) but I kind of like your idea of putting the log-methods into the enum instead. This leaves the Logger interface alone, which is nice. It should be extended by the various other methods, including isEnabled(Logger)/isEnabled(Logger, Marker), though - as you said.

Thanks for letting me know, Joern.

Thanks - actually I'd prefer your way, it seems more natural, but I could do this way without needing a change. I've just tidied it up using reflection to make it much easier to add the missing methods, though probably at a small performance cost. Rob