[DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Russell E Glaue
I am not sure if it is best to add upgrades to libraries in the current 6.1
release. So if there is to be a suggested Improvement upgrade for a library,
would the target version be 6.2 or 7.0 ?
Or is the 6.1 version an acceptable target for a library upgrade and new feature?


Jetty6.1 currently has slf4j 1.3.1 library support.
I have added a JIRA for Jetty7 to support the latest slf4j 1.5.x,
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-865

If there is going to be a 6.2 release of Jetty, I'd like to add an Improvement
JIRA issue to upgrade slf4j libraries in Jetty6.2.
Of course an upgrade to slf4j 1.5.x is most desirable, but I think even an
upgrade to 1.4.x would be good.

The Geronimo 2.1.3 release that uses Jetty 6.1.7 implements slf4j version 1.4.3
(it strips out the older 1.3.1). So I imagine there should not be any trouble in
at least upgrading Jetty6 to 1.4.x.



Also, on the same note, I would like to request an Improvement JIRA issue to
support logback, http://logback.qos.ch/

The reasoning for this improvement is to take advantage of a more enterprise
worthy access logging capability. And logback already has Jetty support!
http://logback.qos.ch/access.html#jetty

As an intended replacement to log4j, logback supports many logging options
including FILE, SYSLOG, SMTP, SOCKET, JMS, and many many more (see:
http://logback.qos.ch/manual/appenders.html).

I believe that to add logback support would boost Jetty's immediate marketing
image and deployability as a capable application that could support enterprise
logging strategies.

All that is necessary is to include two logback libraries into the Jetty
distribution: logback-core and logback-access (preferably the latest 0.9.x).
And then upgrade the Jetty documentation a little more (See current Wiki
documentation here: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/JETTY/Logging+Requests - as
discussed in http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-835).

And FYI, these two libraries are not dependent on or related to any SLF4J
version, and their inclusion would not break anything.


-RG

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Jesse McConnell
I don't have time to look at logback in detail right this minute but
since you seem to know a lot about it, what is the IP status of
it...license, etc

with jetty heading towards eclipse atm, we'll have to go through a
full check, including dependencies...that is one fundamental issue we
would need to address.

if it is already in use within eclipse and is already cleared that
would be best and might merit more serious consideration.

jesse

--
jesse mcconnell
[hidden email]



On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Russell E Glaue <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am not sure if it is best to add upgrades to libraries in the current 6.1
> release. So if there is to be a suggested Improvement upgrade for a library,
> would the target version be 6.2 or 7.0 ?
> Or is the 6.1 version an acceptable target for a library upgrade and new feature?
>
>
> Jetty6.1 currently has slf4j 1.3.1 library support.
> I have added a JIRA for Jetty7 to support the latest slf4j 1.5.x,
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-865
>
> If there is going to be a 6.2 release of Jetty, I'd like to add an Improvement
> JIRA issue to upgrade slf4j libraries in Jetty6.2.
> Of course an upgrade to slf4j 1.5.x is most desirable, but I think even an
> upgrade to 1.4.x would be good.
>
> The Geronimo 2.1.3 release that uses Jetty 6.1.7 implements slf4j version 1.4.3
> (it strips out the older 1.3.1). So I imagine there should not be any trouble in
> at least upgrading Jetty6 to 1.4.x.
>
>
>
> Also, on the same note, I would like to request an Improvement JIRA issue to
> support logback, http://logback.qos.ch/
>
> The reasoning for this improvement is to take advantage of a more enterprise
> worthy access logging capability. And logback already has Jetty support!
> http://logback.qos.ch/access.html#jetty
>
> As an intended replacement to log4j, logback supports many logging options
> including FILE, SYSLOG, SMTP, SOCKET, JMS, and many many more (see:
> http://logback.qos.ch/manual/appenders.html).
>
> I believe that to add logback support would boost Jetty's immediate marketing
> image and deployability as a capable application that could support enterprise
> logging strategies.
>
> All that is necessary is to include two logback libraries into the Jetty
> distribution: logback-core and logback-access (preferably the latest 0.9.x).
> And then upgrade the Jetty documentation a little more (See current Wiki
> documentation here: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/JETTY/Logging+Requests - as
> discussed in http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-835).
>
> And FYI, these two libraries are not dependent on or related to any SLF4J
> version, and their inclusion would not break anything.
>
>
> -RG
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Russell E Glaue

The license for logback is "GNU Lesser General Public License Version 2.1" LGPL-2.1.
http://logback.qos.ch/license.html

The license for SLF4J, which Jetty6 already supports is "...identical to those
of the MIT License, also called the X License or the X11 License." "...It is
also known to be approved by the Apache Software Foundation as compatible with
Apache Software License."
http://www.slf4j.org/license.html


As far as Logback in eclipse, this is what I have seen:
"Logback Console Plugin for Eclipse"
http://logback.qos.ch/consolePlugin.html
(another good reason for Jetty to contain Logback support, if Jetty is heading
towards eclipse)
http://www.eclipse-plugins.info/eclipse/plugin_details.jsp?id=1823
license: BSD License, Common Public License, GNU Library or Lesser General
Public License (LGPL)


-RG


Jesse McConnell wrote:

> I don't have time to look at logback in detail right this minute but
> since you seem to know a lot about it, what is the IP status of
> it...license, etc
>
> with jetty heading towards eclipse atm, we'll have to go through a
> full check, including dependencies...that is one fundamental issue we
> would need to address.
>
> if it is already in use within eclipse and is already cleared that
> would be best and might merit more serious consideration.
>
> jesse
>
> --
> jesse mcconnell
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Russell E Glaue <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I am not sure if it is best to add upgrades to libraries in the current 6.1
>> release. So if there is to be a suggested Improvement upgrade for a library,
>> would the target version be 6.2 or 7.0 ?
>> Or is the 6.1 version an acceptable target for a library upgrade and new feature?
>>
>>
>> Jetty6.1 currently has slf4j 1.3.1 library support.
>> I have added a JIRA for Jetty7 to support the latest slf4j 1.5.x,
>> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-865
>>
>> If there is going to be a 6.2 release of Jetty, I'd like to add an Improvement
>> JIRA issue to upgrade slf4j libraries in Jetty6.2.
>> Of course an upgrade to slf4j 1.5.x is most desirable, but I think even an
>> upgrade to 1.4.x would be good.
>>
>> The Geronimo 2.1.3 release that uses Jetty 6.1.7 implements slf4j version 1.4.3
>> (it strips out the older 1.3.1). So I imagine there should not be any trouble in
>> at least upgrading Jetty6 to 1.4.x.
>>
>>
>>
>> Also, on the same note, I would like to request an Improvement JIRA issue to
>> support logback, http://logback.qos.ch/
>>
>> The reasoning for this improvement is to take advantage of a more enterprise
>> worthy access logging capability. And logback already has Jetty support!
>> http://logback.qos.ch/access.html#jetty
>>
>> As an intended replacement to log4j, logback supports many logging options
>> including FILE, SYSLOG, SMTP, SOCKET, JMS, and many many more (see:
>> http://logback.qos.ch/manual/appenders.html).
>>
>> I believe that to add logback support would boost Jetty's immediate marketing
>> image and deployability as a capable application that could support enterprise
>> logging strategies.
>>
>> All that is necessary is to include two logback libraries into the Jetty
>> distribution: logback-core and logback-access (preferably the latest 0.9.x).
>> And then upgrade the Jetty documentation a little more (See current Wiki
>> documentation here: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/JETTY/Logging+Requests - as
>> discussed in http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-835).
>>
>> And FYI, these two libraries are not dependent on or related to any SLF4J
>> version, and their inclusion would not break anything.
>>
>>
>> -RG
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Jesse McConnell
well jetty would be going to eclipse dual-licensed, both the EPL and APL..

we'll have to think about any implications about this...maybe greg
will weigh in

have to give it a bit of thought

thanks for being a champion for it :)
jesse

--
jesse mcconnell
[hidden email]



On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Russell E Glaue <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> The license for logback is "GNU Lesser General Public License Version 2.1" LGPL-2.1.
> http://logback.qos.ch/license.html
>
> The license for SLF4J, which Jetty6 already supports is "...identical to those
> of the MIT License, also called the X License or the X11 License." "...It is
> also known to be approved by the Apache Software Foundation as compatible with
> Apache Software License."
> http://www.slf4j.org/license.html
>
>
> As far as Logback in eclipse, this is what I have seen:
> "Logback Console Plugin for Eclipse"
> http://logback.qos.ch/consolePlugin.html
> (another good reason for Jetty to contain Logback support, if Jetty is heading
> towards eclipse)
> http://www.eclipse-plugins.info/eclipse/plugin_details.jsp?id=1823
> license: BSD License, Common Public License, GNU Library or Lesser General
> Public License (LGPL)
>
>
> -RG
>
>
> Jesse McConnell wrote:
>> I don't have time to look at logback in detail right this minute but
>> since you seem to know a lot about it, what is the IP status of
>> it...license, etc
>>
>> with jetty heading towards eclipse atm, we'll have to go through a
>> full check, including dependencies...that is one fundamental issue we
>> would need to address.
>>
>> if it is already in use within eclipse and is already cleared that
>> would be best and might merit more serious consideration.
>>
>> jesse
>>
>> --
>> jesse mcconnell
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Russell E Glaue <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> I am not sure if it is best to add upgrades to libraries in the current 6.1
>>> release. So if there is to be a suggested Improvement upgrade for a library,
>>> would the target version be 6.2 or 7.0 ?
>>> Or is the 6.1 version an acceptable target for a library upgrade and new feature?
>>>
>>>
>>> Jetty6.1 currently has slf4j 1.3.1 library support.
>>> I have added a JIRA for Jetty7 to support the latest slf4j 1.5.x,
>>> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-865
>>>
>>> If there is going to be a 6.2 release of Jetty, I'd like to add an Improvement
>>> JIRA issue to upgrade slf4j libraries in Jetty6.2.
>>> Of course an upgrade to slf4j 1.5.x is most desirable, but I think even an
>>> upgrade to 1.4.x would be good.
>>>
>>> The Geronimo 2.1.3 release that uses Jetty 6.1.7 implements slf4j version 1.4.3
>>> (it strips out the older 1.3.1). So I imagine there should not be any trouble in
>>> at least upgrading Jetty6 to 1.4.x.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Also, on the same note, I would like to request an Improvement JIRA issue to
>>> support logback, http://logback.qos.ch/
>>>
>>> The reasoning for this improvement is to take advantage of a more enterprise
>>> worthy access logging capability. And logback already has Jetty support!
>>> http://logback.qos.ch/access.html#jetty
>>>
>>> As an intended replacement to log4j, logback supports many logging options
>>> including FILE, SYSLOG, SMTP, SOCKET, JMS, and many many more (see:
>>> http://logback.qos.ch/manual/appenders.html).
>>>
>>> I believe that to add logback support would boost Jetty's immediate marketing
>>> image and deployability as a capable application that could support enterprise
>>> logging strategies.
>>>
>>> All that is necessary is to include two logback libraries into the Jetty
>>> distribution: logback-core and logback-access (preferably the latest 0.9.x).
>>> And then upgrade the Jetty documentation a little more (See current Wiki
>>> documentation here: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/JETTY/Logging+Requests - as
>>> discussed in http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-835).
>>>
>>> And FYI, these two libraries are not dependent on or related to any SLF4J
>>> version, and their inclusion would not break anything.
>>>
>>>
>>> -RG
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>>
>>>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Russell E Glaue
I was reading this:

http://www.eclipse.org/legal/committerguidelines.php

Particularly the section: Third-Party Content
"Some examples of such packages currently being redistributed by the Eclipse
Foundation are projects maintained by The Apache Software Foundation,..."

GTK+ is licensed under LGPL-2.1
So logback which is also licensed under LGPL-2.1 should be acceptable.


The X11 type license is compatible with the GPL
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
So SLF4J should also be acceptable.


In summary, if SLF4J and Logback libraries are included in Jetty, and Jetty
heads towards Eclipse, the Eclipse Foundation should have not have any issue
with the SLF4J and Logback library support in Jetty since:
1. The Foundation already accepts 3rd party code licensed under LGPL-2.1
2. The X11 type license is listed by GNU as a "GPL-Compatible Free Software
License" *1
3. The APL is listed by GNU as a "GPL-Compatible Free Software License" *1

Note: *1 : http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses

-RG


Jesse McConnell wrote:

> well jetty would be going to eclipse dual-licensed, both the EPL and APL..
>
> we'll have to think about any implications about this...maybe greg
> will weigh in
>
> have to give it a bit of thought
>
> thanks for being a champion for it :)
> jesse
>
> --
> jesse mcconnell
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Russell E Glaue <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> The license for logback is "GNU Lesser General Public License Version 2.1" LGPL-2.1.
>> http://logback.qos.ch/license.html
>>
>> The license for SLF4J, which Jetty6 already supports is "...identical to those
>> of the MIT License, also called the X License or the X11 License." "...It is
>> also known to be approved by the Apache Software Foundation as compatible with
>> Apache Software License."
>> http://www.slf4j.org/license.html
>>
>>
>> As far as Logback in eclipse, this is what I have seen:
>> "Logback Console Plugin for Eclipse"
>> http://logback.qos.ch/consolePlugin.html
>> (another good reason for Jetty to contain Logback support, if Jetty is heading
>> towards eclipse)
>> http://www.eclipse-plugins.info/eclipse/plugin_details.jsp?id=1823
>> license: BSD License, Common Public License, GNU Library or Lesser General
>> Public License (LGPL)
>>
>>
>> -RG
>>
>>
>> Jesse McConnell wrote:
>>> I don't have time to look at logback in detail right this minute but
>>> since you seem to know a lot about it, what is the IP status of
>>> it...license, etc
>>>
>>> with jetty heading towards eclipse atm, we'll have to go through a
>>> full check, including dependencies...that is one fundamental issue we
>>> would need to address.
>>>
>>> if it is already in use within eclipse and is already cleared that
>>> would be best and might merit more serious consideration.
>>>
>>> jesse
>>>
>>> --
>>> jesse mcconnell
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Russell E Glaue <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> I am not sure if it is best to add upgrades to libraries in the current 6.1
>>>> release. So if there is to be a suggested Improvement upgrade for a library,
>>>> would the target version be 6.2 or 7.0 ?
>>>> Or is the 6.1 version an acceptable target for a library upgrade and new feature?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jetty6.1 currently has slf4j 1.3.1 library support.
>>>> I have added a JIRA for Jetty7 to support the latest slf4j 1.5.x,
>>>> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-865
>>>>
>>>> If there is going to be a 6.2 release of Jetty, I'd like to add an Improvement
>>>> JIRA issue to upgrade slf4j libraries in Jetty6.2.
>>>> Of course an upgrade to slf4j 1.5.x is most desirable, but I think even an
>>>> upgrade to 1.4.x would be good.
>>>>
>>>> The Geronimo 2.1.3 release that uses Jetty 6.1.7 implements slf4j version 1.4.3
>>>> (it strips out the older 1.3.1). So I imagine there should not be any trouble in
>>>> at least upgrading Jetty6 to 1.4.x.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also, on the same note, I would like to request an Improvement JIRA issue to
>>>> support logback, http://logback.qos.ch/
>>>>
>>>> The reasoning for this improvement is to take advantage of a more enterprise
>>>> worthy access logging capability. And logback already has Jetty support!
>>>> http://logback.qos.ch/access.html#jetty
>>>>
>>>> As an intended replacement to log4j, logback supports many logging options
>>>> including FILE, SYSLOG, SMTP, SOCKET, JMS, and many many more (see:
>>>> http://logback.qos.ch/manual/appenders.html).
>>>>
>>>> I believe that to add logback support would boost Jetty's immediate marketing
>>>> image and deployability as a capable application that could support enterprise
>>>> logging strategies.
>>>>
>>>> All that is necessary is to include two logback libraries into the Jetty
>>>> distribution: logback-core and logback-access (preferably the latest 0.9.x).
>>>> And then upgrade the Jetty documentation a little more (See current Wiki
>>>> documentation here: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/JETTY/Logging+Requests - as
>>>> discussed in http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-835).
>>>>
>>>> And FYI, these two libraries are not dependent on or related to any SLF4J
>>>> version, and their inclusion would not break anything.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -RG
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>>>
>>>>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>>
>>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Greg Wilkins-5
In reply to this post by Russell E Glaue

I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).

I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
based impl to be a little more efficient.


As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
wait to see if we are accepted at apache.

If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
based.

Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.

cheers


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Greg Wilkins-5
In reply to this post by Russell E Glaue

I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).

I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
based impl to be a little more efficient.


As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
wait to see if we are accepted at apache.

If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
based.

Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.

cheers


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Greg Wilkins-5
In reply to this post by Russell E Glaue

I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).

I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
based impl to be a little more efficient.


As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
wait to see if we are accepted at apache.

If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
based.

Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.

cheers


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Russell E Glaue
Wouldn't SLF4J libraries be in the same boat as logback libraries?

Are you suggesting that SLF4J libraries will be accepted because they have been
a part of Jetty for a long time now?

And for logback, since these libraries would be introduced only now that it
would be problematic and raise a flag for Eclipse?

-RG


Greg Wilkins wrote:

>
> I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
> in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).
>
> I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
> based impl to be a little more efficient.
>
>
> As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
> wait to see if we are accepted at apache.
>
> If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
> the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
> based.
>
> Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
> bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
> on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
> components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.
>
> cheers
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Jan Bartel
Russell,

I think what Greg is saying is that the slf4j jars are already
included in jetty-6, so upgrading the slf4j jars would be
a no brainer. Note that slf4j jars are only present in the jsp-2.0 module
and only to satisfy jsp-2.0's use of commons logging.

Jetty-7 in fact doesn't use slf4j, because there is no jsp-2.0.

So the only consideration is whether to introduce logback. As
the idea would be to streamline and componentize jetty-7 even
further, then adding logback would probably be contra-indicated.
A more natural place for it would be the hightide distribution
of jetty, which will be remaining at codehaus. See
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/JETTY/Hightide+Documentation
for more info.

cheers
Jan

Russell E Glaue wrote:

> Wouldn't SLF4J libraries be in the same boat as logback libraries?
>
> Are you suggesting that SLF4J libraries will be accepted because they have been
> a part of Jetty for a long time now?
>
> And for logback, since these libraries would be introduced only now that it
> would be problematic and raise a flag for Eclipse?
>
> -RG
>
>
> Greg Wilkins wrote:
>> I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
>> in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).
>>
>> I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
>> based impl to be a little more efficient.
>>
>>
>> As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
>> wait to see if we are accepted at apache.
>>
>> If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
>> the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
>> based.
>>
>> Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
>> bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
>> on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
>> components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.
>>
>> cheers
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
>


--
Jan Bartel, Webtide LLC | [hidden email] | http://www.webtide.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Ceki Gulcu

Hello Jan,

If necessary, I'd be happy to help with the logback integration in Hightide.

Cheers,

Jan Bartel wrote:

> Russell,
>
> I think what Greg is saying is that the slf4j jars are already
> included in jetty-6, so upgrading the slf4j jars would be
> a no brainer. Note that slf4j jars are only present in the jsp-2.0 module
> and only to satisfy jsp-2.0's use of commons logging.
>
> Jetty-7 in fact doesn't use slf4j, because there is no jsp-2.0.
>
> So the only consideration is whether to introduce logback. As
> the idea would be to streamline and componentize jetty-7 even
> further, then adding logback would probably be contra-indicated.
> A more natural place for it would be the hightide distribution
> of jetty, which will be remaining at codehaus. See
> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/JETTY/Hightide+Documentation
> for more info.
>
> cheers
> Jan


--
Ceki Gülcü
Logback: The reliable, generic, fast and flexible logging framework for Java.
http://logback.qos.ch

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Russell E Glaue
In reply to this post by Jan Bartel
Yes, that is what I was getting at.
Thanks for this info.

So then if SLF4J is no longer needed from Jetty-7 forward, then it perhaps
should be a candidate for removal in Jetty-7 ?

If moving to Eclipse and be streamlined and componentized, then I would think
there is motivation to strip Jetty-7 down to the bare minimum necessities. And
remove slf4j if not used.

logback (logback-access and logback-core) is intended to replace log4j, but I
assume the "log4j-like" support is still a necessity and their is no desire nor
motivation to replace the existing log4j implementation with logback.
Especially since log4j is APL, and Jetty will be a dual EPL-APL.

That is, in some regard, a pitty however if 3rd party software ends up being
restricted from being used in the core distro due to stricter license
compatiblity requirements (even though all licenses are GPL compatible).

I use Jetty in upstream software, so I am not interested at this time with a
jetty-hightide distribution.


I am aware of the Jetty @ Eclipse move, and I know that Greg also initially
shared in the fear that Eclipse might have required some changes that made
Jetty's integration into upstream software (JBoss, Geronimo) more difficult.
I appreciate we all have the same desire for Jetty, and Greg has been a great
leader to keep Jetty's future with all upstream software strong.

I understand that the componentized version of Jetty @ Eclipse will actually be
something like a "jetty-core" which is intended to be used by the upstream software.

And of course, the upstream software can implement logback if they choose. So
that would be a second argument to not include logback in Jetty-core.


Jan, you said "Jetty-7 in fact doesn't use slf4j, because there is no jsp-2.0."
And if we follow Greg's thinking (as he posted about Jetty @ Eclipse back in
early December), than any unused 3rd party software (especially ones without an
APL/EPL license) should be removed - or as suggested in his previous e-mail,
moved to the jetty-hightide distribution.

The Jetty-hightide distro and other upstream software (JBoss, Geronimo) can
implement slf4j on their own.

One fear about including slf4j in the jetty7-core distro when it is not used
anywhere in Jetty-7, is that the library will not be upgraded with new releases
(as has been discussed here and in http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JETTY-865).
This results in upstream software stripping this from Jetty in order to
implement the preferred (newer) version, as has already been happenning.

Of course, although a fan of the Apache Foundation, I will vote for the use of
SLF4J and Logback over Commons Logging and Log4j. If there is a need in Jetty
for these resources, I will vote for slf4j and Logback as the preferred.


Thanks Greg and Jan for the discussion.
Greg, I am on board with you with Jetty @ Eclipse.
I will always back the availability of a minimal jetty (jetty-core or
jetty-minimal) which can be used in upstream software like Geronimo and JBoss.

-RG


Jan Bartel wrote:

> Russell,
>
> I think what Greg is saying is that the slf4j jars are already
> included in jetty-6, so upgrading the slf4j jars would be
> a no brainer. Note that slf4j jars are only present in the jsp-2.0 module
> and only to satisfy jsp-2.0's use of commons logging.
>
> Jetty-7 in fact doesn't use slf4j, because there is no jsp-2.0.
>
> So the only consideration is whether to introduce logback. As
> the idea would be to streamline and componentize jetty-7 even
> further, then adding logback would probably be contra-indicated.
> A more natural place for it would be the hightide distribution
> of jetty, which will be remaining at codehaus. See
> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/JETTY/Hightide+Documentation
> for more info.
>
> cheers
> Jan
>
> Russell E Glaue wrote:
>> Wouldn't SLF4J libraries be in the same boat as logback libraries?
>>
>> Are you suggesting that SLF4J libraries will be accepted because they have been
>> a part of Jetty for a long time now?
>>
>> And for logback, since these libraries would be introduced only now that it
>> would be problematic and raise a flag for Eclipse?
>>
>> -RG
>>
>>
>> Greg Wilkins wrote:
>>> I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
>>> in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).
>>>
>>> I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
>>> based impl to be a little more efficient.
>>>
>>>
>>> As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
>>> wait to see if we are accepted at apache.
>>>
>>> If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
>>> the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
>>> based.
>>>
>>> Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
>>> bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
>>> on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
>>> components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>>
>>>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Russell E Glaue
In reply to this post by Greg Wilkins-5
Greg,

I was pointed to this by another Apache member:
http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html

You are very right to have the caution you have expressed.
Thank you.

According to the URL I provided above, the LGPL (which Logback uses) has been
decided to not be allowed to be included in Apache products.

However, according to the same document, the X11 (which SLF4J uses) has been
decided to be allowed to be included in Apache products.


-RG



Greg Wilkins wrote:

>
> I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
> in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).
>
> I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
> based impl to be a little more efficient.
>
>
> As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
> wait to see if we are accepted at apache.
>
> If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
> the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
> based.
>
> Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
> bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
> on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
> components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.
>
> cheers
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Jan Bartel
Our fearless leader is a little confused - he meant to say
" the best way forward ... is to wait to see if we are accepted
at ECLIPSE".

Too much late-night jetty coding?!

Speaking of Eclipse, here's the link to the project proposal:
http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/jetty/

cheers
Jan

Russell E Glaue wrote:

> Greg,
>
> I was pointed to this by another Apache member:
> http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>
> You are very right to have the caution you have expressed.
> Thank you.
>
> According to the URL I provided above, the LGPL (which Logback uses) has been
> decided to not be allowed to be included in Apache products.
>
> However, according to the same document, the X11 (which SLF4J uses) has been
> decided to be allowed to be included in Apache products.
>
>
> -RG
>
>
>
> Greg Wilkins wrote:
>> I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
>> in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).
>>
>> I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
>> based impl to be a little more efficient.
>>
>>
>> As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
>> wait to see if we are accepted at apache.
>>
>> If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
>> the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
>> based.
>>
>> Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
>> bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
>> on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
>> components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.
>>
>> cheers
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
>


--
Jan Bartel, Webtide LLC | [hidden email] | http://www.webtide.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Russell E Glaue
Yes, I caught the typo.
I believe we can assume that the Eclipse Foundation will have similar legal rulings.

Although I disagree that all LGPL licensed software should be disallowed from
being bundled in APL software entirely. I believe there are exceptions.

Logback, for example, implements the Jetty RequestLog interface. And Jetty is
not a derived work of Logback.

But I believe Greg is right. We should wait until Jetty is settled with Eclipse
before looking at something like this.

-RG


Jan Bartel wrote:

> Our fearless leader is a little confused - he meant to say
> " the best way forward ... is to wait to see if we are accepted
> at ECLIPSE".
>
> Too much late-night jetty coding?!
>
> Speaking of Eclipse, here's the link to the project proposal:
> http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/jetty/
>
> cheers
> Jan
>
> Russell E Glaue wrote:
>> Greg,
>>
>> I was pointed to this by another Apache member:
>> http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>>
>> You are very right to have the caution you have expressed.
>> Thank you.
>>
>> According to the URL I provided above, the LGPL (which Logback uses) has been
>> decided to not be allowed to be included in Apache products.
>>
>> However, according to the same document, the X11 (which SLF4J uses) has been
>> decided to be allowed to be included in Apache products.
>>
>>
>> -RG
>>
>>
>>
>> Greg Wilkins wrote:
>>> I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
>>> in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).
>>>
>>> I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
>>> based impl to be a little more efficient.
>>>
>>>
>>> As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
>>> wait to see if we are accepted at apache.
>>>
>>> If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
>>> the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
>>> based.
>>>
>>> Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
>>> bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
>>> on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
>>> components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>>
>>>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Jetty 6.2 or 7.0 for new features?

Jesse McConnell
would be nice if logback were a little more friendly of a license as well...

ah well, we'll see how it pans out

jesse

--
jesse mcconnell
[hidden email]



On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Russell E Glaue <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Yes, I caught the typo.
> I believe we can assume that the Eclipse Foundation will have similar legal rulings.
>
> Although I disagree that all LGPL licensed software should be disallowed from
> being bundled in APL software entirely. I believe there are exceptions.
>
> Logback, for example, implements the Jetty RequestLog interface. And Jetty is
> not a derived work of Logback.
>
> But I believe Greg is right. We should wait until Jetty is settled with Eclipse
> before looking at something like this.
>
> -RG
>
>
> Jan Bartel wrote:
>> Our fearless leader is a little confused - he meant to say
>> " the best way forward ... is to wait to see if we are accepted
>> at ECLIPSE".
>>
>> Too much late-night jetty coding?!
>>
>> Speaking of Eclipse, here's the link to the project proposal:
>> http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/jetty/
>>
>> cheers
>> Jan
>>
>> Russell E Glaue wrote:
>>> Greg,
>>>
>>> I was pointed to this by another Apache member:
>>> http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>>>
>>> You are very right to have the caution you have expressed.
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> According to the URL I provided above, the LGPL (which Logback uses) has been
>>> decided to not be allowed to be included in Apache products.
>>>
>>> However, according to the same document, the X11 (which SLF4J uses) has been
>>> decided to be allowed to be included in Apache products.
>>>
>>>
>>> -RG
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Greg Wilkins wrote:
>>>> I think we should certainly look to move to the latest slf4j
>>>> in Jetty-7 (and then maybe in any 6.2 if there is one).
>>>>
>>>> I think we should also consider refining the current reflection
>>>> based impl to be a little more efficient.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As for logback,  what I think is the best way forward... is to
>>>> wait to see if we are accepted at apache.
>>>>
>>>> If we are, my feeling is that logback would not be included in
>>>> the jetty release from eclipse - which would be very component
>>>> based.
>>>>
>>>> Instead, we would consider making it a part of the hightide
>>>> bundled release of Jetty, which will become the focus of efforts
>>>> on Codehaus and will aggregate the eclipse components with other
>>>> components (eg logback) to make the app server distro.
>>>>
>>>> cheers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>>>
>>>>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>>
>>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email