I'm fine with it just picking the first one, but certainly when there is more than one a very, very clear error message should be output that tells a user exactly what is wrong and what to do.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">
On 2/16/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Jukka Zitting</b> <<a href="mailto:jukka.zitting@gmail.com">jukka.zitting@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi,<br><br>On 2/16/07, Eric Crahen <<a href="mailto:eric.crahen.lists@gmail.com">eric.crahen.lists@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> As I said, deploying the correct implementation jar IS a kind of<br>> configuration, weather you call it that or not.
<br><br>Exactly, and I think this should be the *only* configuration SLF4J<br>would ever need. Any solution that requires extra configuration<br>properties or explicit precedence settings is IMHO too much.<br><br>The fact that SLF4J always uses the implementation jar that is first
<br>available in the classloading hierarchy is simple and easy to<br>understand. I don't see any good use cases that would require anything<br>more complex.<br><br>The ServiceFactory approach sounds like a good solution to the
<br>compile-time issues you mentioned earlier, but I think it should only<br>be used to duplicate the current runtime behaviour without any extra<br>configuration options or even the misconfiguration heuristics you<br>suggested.
<br><br>BR,<br><br>Jukka Zitting<br>_______________________________________________<br>dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:dev@slf4j.org">dev@slf4j.org</a><br><a href="http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev">http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><br>- Eric