Skip to content

Bump jul-to-slf4j and jcl-over-slf4j to version 2.0.16#6409

Merged
jburel merged 1 commit intoome:developfrom
sbesson:jul_jcl_2.x
Nov 21, 2024
Merged

Bump jul-to-slf4j and jcl-over-slf4j to version 2.0.16#6409
jburel merged 1 commit intoome:developfrom
sbesson:jul_jcl_2.x

Conversation

@sbesson
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@sbesson sbesson commented Aug 21, 2024

Motivated primarily by the regression in #6405 and #6405 (comment), this bumps the version of jul-to-slf4j and jcl-over-slf4j to the latest release of the 2.0.x series, currently 2.0.16. These should be compatible with the version of slf4j-api which is now shipped in OMERO.server.

As an additional feature, the latest version of jul-to-slf4j now depends on reload4j (rather than log4j) for testing purposes. This does not resolve the dependency problems raised in #6405 but it further reduces the chances of log4j.jar unexpectedly creeping into the binaries.

Testing should confirm that logging statements using either JCL (Apache Commons Logging, formerly Jakarta Commons Logging) or JUL (java.util.logging) as still handled via slf4 and ultimately logback.

Unfortunately the biggest usage of these logging frameworks will be in third-party dependencies since the majority of the OMERO code base has been converted to using slf4j and logback over a decade ago - #1006.

Within OMERO, there are still a few classes making internal use of either JCL or JUL:

As a follow-up all the classes above could probably be updated to use the slf4j API and get rid of JCL and JUL at least in the OME codebase. I'll hold on opening these until this has been tested as it could make the testing more complicated.

Maintenance bump to match the fact the underlying slf4j-api has
now been upgraded to 2.0.x
@sbesson sbesson requested review from jburel and joshmoore August 21, 2024 10:25
@jburel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

jburel commented Nov 20, 2024

@sbesson Do you need/have a ticket to capture the work to follow-up?

@sbesson
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

sbesson commented Nov 20, 2024

@sbesson Do you need/have a ticket to capture the work to follow-up?

I have not done anything as I was waiting for feedback on the proposed changes first. Happy to capture as issues if this work would be up for consideration. In that case, would it be preferable to have a single issue in this repository or three issues in omero-model, omero-server and omero-blitz?

@jburel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

jburel commented Nov 21, 2024

A single issue will make sense.

@sbesson
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

sbesson commented Nov 21, 2024

A single issue will make sense.

Opened as #6416

@sbesson sbesson deleted the jul_jcl_2.x branch February 3, 2025 15:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants