[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: openejb-development
Subject: Re: SLF4J 2.x in TomEE 9.1.x and 10.0.x?
From: Jonathan Gallimore <jonathan.gallimore () gmail ! com>
Date: 2023-11-20 14:41:44
Message-ID: CAGRgoZjL_rjVh92MUMoezXi26F4B4w7LZLvO66n952F6G4jnqw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
I've no issue with including it in 8.x, with respect to the EOL
announcement.
What I'm really asking is: if we do this update in 8.x, and you know it'll
negatively impact you (i.e. you'll have some sort of regression), please
say so.
I'll give it a couple of days and then merge the change in, unless we hear
of anything that suggests there would be an issue.
Jon
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:32 PM Alex The Rocker <alex.m3tal@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1 for this change, given that there's still some time before end of
> this year (=potential for some critical CVEs fixing anyway)
>
> Le lun. 20 nov. 2023 Ã 12:05, Jean-Louis Monteiro
> <jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com> a écrit :
> >
> > Based on the timing (mid-November) and the EOL end of this year, is it
> > worth it?
> > I'd say no. But it's up to you
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 10:48 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
> > jonathan.gallimore@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I make these changes to 9.x and main - is there any objection to
> making the
> > > change to 8.x as well?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 3:28 PM Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > jonathan.gallimore@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for the feedback, and especially the pointer to the JIRA!
> > > >
> > > > Jon
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 3:26 PM Richard Zowalla <rzo1@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I am ok with the change. I would just updating the related deps in
> our
> > > > > webapps. A backing arquillian test would be useful, I guess.
> > > > >
> > > > > While looking into it (related to logging & classloaders), it might
> be
> > > > > interesting to also have a look on [1].
> > > > >
> > > > > For TomeEE 10, I would like to first have the owb4 branch on main,
> > > > > though (just waiting for johnzon 2.0.0).
> > > > >
> > > > > Gruß
> > > > > Richard
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/TOMEE/issues/TOMEE-4242
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Mittwoch, dem 25.10.2023 um 15:19 +0100 schrieb Jonathan
> Gallimore:
> > > > > > I'm hoping the URLClassLoaderFirst change would mean that the
> slf4j-
> > > > > > api
> > > > > > 1.7.x could keep working for you. I'd be happy to add an
> Arquillian
> > > > > > test to
> > > > > > check that as part of a PR for the change. Does that sound ok?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The upstream dependencies are not pulling in logback.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If someone wanted to use logback with SLF4J, in a Jakarta EE
> version
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > TomEE, by bundling both slf4j-api and logback in their
> application,
> > > > > > they'd
> > > > > > have to use slf4j-api 2.x (because the Jakarta EE version of
> logback
> > > > > > requires that API level).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jon
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 3:06 PM Jonathan S. Fisher
> > > > > > <exabrial@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > While we use slf4j-api 1.7.x, I'm totally ok with a 2.x upgrade,
> > > > > > > although it'd be best if the dependency wasn't seen by the apps
> > > > > > > somehow. I know that's a lot of classloader acrobatics :)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just to clarify though, the upstream dependencies are or are not
> > > > > > > including logback? If they are including logback, that
> transitive
> > > > > > > dependency ought to be blocked... it's up to the final
> developer to
> > > > > > > decide which binding implementation to use. Including a binding
> > > > > > > (over
> > > > > > > the default sysout binding) would likely cause problems for
> users.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 8:58 AM Jonathan Gallimore
> > > > > > > <jonathan.gallimore@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There's a couple of suggestions I'd like to run past the
> group to
> > > > > > > > see if
> > > > > > > > there's any thoughts / potential issues.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The first is: updating to SLF4J 2.x API and JUL implementation
> > > > > > > > (specifically 2.0.9) in TomEE. There's a couple of rationale
> > > > > > > > here:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - The 1.x branch of SLF4J is no longer maintained
> > > > > > > > - At least one of the bindings (Logback) requires a SLF4J 2.x
> API
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > Jakarta EE support
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Secondly, thanks to this bit of code in the class loader:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/main/container/openejb-core/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/util/classloader/URLClassLoaderFirst.java#L600-L619
>
> > > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > > it is possible for a webapp to include its own SLF4J API and
> > > > > > > > binding in
> > > > > > > its
> > > > > > > > WEB-INF/lib to use its own logging config. With SLF4J 2.x,
> > > > > > > > org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class is not included with
> the
> > > > > > > > binders,
> > > > > > > > nor is it called, so shouldSkipSlf4j() returns true, even when
> > > > > > > > SLF4J and
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > binder is present in the web app. Simply removing this method,
> > > > > > > > and the
> > > > > > > > single place it is called seems to enable the web app to do
> its
> > > > > > > > own
> > > > > > > logging
> > > > > > > > with its own binder.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I've run a TCK build with both of these changes present, and
> it
> > > > > > > > looks ok.
> > > > > > > > Does anyone have any feedback with respect to these
> proposals? Is
> > > > > > > > anyone
> > > > > > > > out there using SLF4J in their applications with these
> versions
> > > > > > > > of TomEE
> > > > > > > > who would be impacted?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jon
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Jonathan | exabrial@gmail.com
> > > > > > > Pessimists, see a jar as half empty. Optimists, in contrast,
> see it
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > half full.
> > > > > > > Engineers, of course, understand the glass is twice as big as it
> > > > > > > needs to
> > > > > > > be.
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic