[Bug 806679] New: Review Request: logback - A Java logging library

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Mar 26 00:06:48 UTC 2012


Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: logback - A Java logging library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806679

           Summary: Review Request: logback - A Java logging library
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: nobody at fedoraproject.org
        ReportedBy: puntogil at libero.it
         QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org
                CC: notting at redhat.com,
                    package-review at lists.fedoraproject.org
    Classification: Fedora
      Story Points: ---
              Type: ---
        Regression: ---
        Mount Type: ---
     Documentation: ---


Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/logback.spec
SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/logback-1.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm
Description: Logback is intended as a successor to the popular log4j project.
At present
time, logback is divided into three modules, logback-core, logback-classic
and logback-access.

The logback-core module lays the groundwork for the other two modules. The
logback-classic module can be assimilated to a significantly improved
version of log4j. Moreover, logback-classic natively implements the SLF4J
API so that you can readily switch back and forth between logback and other
logging frameworks such as log4j or java.util.logging (JUL).

The logback-access module integrates with Servlet containers, such as
Tomcat and Jetty, to provide HTTP-access log functionality. Note that you
could easily build your own module on top of logback-core.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.



More information about the package-review mailing list