> Does this mean I'm not up to date? Or were the tests not updated with the
> change to logging?
No change has been made to logging yet (unless I did some git mistake,
not impossible :-)
But I think this is caused by the fact that lift-webkit includes
slf4j-simple as test dependency as well as jwebunit-htmlunit-plugin
which in turn includes slf4j-log4j12 causing two slf4j logging backends
to be included. This seems like bad packaging of jwebunit (the mistake
we'll try to avoid in #309 :-)
In general I think some of the dependencies need cleanup (ie lift-openid
includes Spring!) and once #309 is done (after M2) we can cleanup the
logging dependencies (ie remove commons-logging)
/Jeppe
On 10/02/10 2:20 PM, Jeppe Nejsum Madsen wrote:
> Naftoli Gugenheim<nafto...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Does this mean I'm not up to date? Or were the tests not updated with the
>> change to logging?
>
> No change has been made to logging yet (unless I did some git mistake,
> not impossible :-)
I don't think either :)
>
> But I think this is caused by the fact that lift-webkit includes
> slf4j-simple as test dependency as well as jwebunit-htmlunit-plugin
> which in turn includes slf4j-log4j12 causing two slf4j logging backends
> to be included. This seems like bad packaging of jwebunit (the mistake
> we'll try to avoid in #309 :-)
Yes, just figured. We have to do some dependency exclusion circus to
clean things. Naftoli, feel free to open a ticket and assign it to me.
>
> In general I think some of the dependencies need cleanup (ie lift-openid
> includes Spring!) and once #309 is done (after M2) we can cleanup the
> logging dependencies (ie remove commons-logging)
Very good point! Post M2, we need to put some effort in cleaning up
things. Yes, the project descriptors would end up being uglier. But
that's less important than shoving in a world of redundant dependencies
during the build (of both Lift proper and the dependent applications).