Hi Ceki,<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 6 September 2010 20:23, Ceki Gülcü <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ceki@qos.ch" target="_blank">ceki@qos.ch</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
If you do not mind, I'd like to get the administrate hurdles cleared first. Could you please read the QOS.ch contributor license agreement? It can be found at:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://logback.qos.ch/cla.txt" target="_blank">http://logback.qos.ch/cla.txt</a><br>
<br>
If you agree with its terms please sign and return by postal mail as indicated in the document.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Agreed and on its way.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I think log4s should be part of the slf4j build. If you concur, then please fork the slf4j project [1] in order to add a new module hosting the contents of the slf4s project. If you are unfamiliar with Maven, I can help you set up. Once that is done, send me a pull request.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I am quite familiar with Maven, used it a lot for Scala and OSGi before I became an SBT [1] fanboy. Getting slf4s in won't be a big deal. Most important question: How should we name the artifact? slf4j-scala-api? slf4j-scala? slf4s-api? slf4s? And how should we name the package? As SLF4S also has got a Logger trait (interface) we need a package different from org.slf4j. I think that org.slf4s is the best choice for the package and therefore the artifact should be slf4s-api. What do you think?</div>
<div><br></div><div>One more thing: I did a lot of OSGi work and I prefer to have the manifest files generated by the great BND tool [2]. There is also the Felix Bundle Plugin which brings BND to Maven. I would like to continue to use it and later convince you to also use it for the rest of SLF4J, because the manifests will just be better (e.g. version policies lead to high quality version ranges, uses directive will be calculated, etc.). Any objections against the first step (using it for SLF4S)? By the way: I really like the fact that SLF4J is OSGi compliant! Good job!</div>
<div><br></div><div>Heiko</div><div><br></div><div>[1] <a href="http://code.google.com/p/simple-build-tool" target="_blank">http://code.google.com/p/simple-build-tool</a></div><div>[2] <a href="http://www.aqute.biz/Code/Bnd">http://www.aqute.biz/Code/Bnd</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>Company: <a href="http://weiglewilczek.com" target="_blank">weiglewilczek.com</a></div></div>Blog: <a href="http://heikoseeberger.name" target="_blank">heikoseeberger.name</a><br>Follow me: <a href="http://twitter.com/hseeberger" target="_blank">twitter.com/hseeberger</a><br>
OSGi on Scala: <a href="http://scalamodules.org" target="_blank">scalamodules.org</a><br>Lift, the simply functional web framework: <a href="http://liftweb.net" target="_blank">liftweb.net</a><br>Akka - Simpler Scalability, Fault-Tolerance, Concurrency & Remoting through Actors: <a href="http://akkasource.org" target="_blank">akkasource.org</a><br>