Rainbow Gum

A modern modular JDK 21+ logging framework that offers implementations for multiple facades like SLF4J / System.Logger and does mostly what you want out of the box.

It is called rainbow gum after Eucalyptus Deglupta a beautiful tree native to Hawaii that has colorful bark (colorful logs).

In Rainbow Gum you can:

• Leverage your existing configuration/application framework (like avaje-config or Spring Boot Environment).
• Do all your logging configuration in Java with a discoverable API of builders
• Only use System Properties and no loading of resources for a ultimate minimal experience
• Or various combinations of the above

Because Rainbow Gum is very modular it can provide a more "choose your own" experience where you can scale down and only use the JDK System.Logger with minimal dependencies or scale up with fully loaded ANSI SLF4J experience. In some cases just adding modules will provide automatic configuration.

Rainbow Gum's default property configuration follows Spring Boot's patterns so if you are familiar with logging.level... than you will feel at home with Rainbow Gum whether you use Spring or not.

Regardless of which configuration option you choose it is GraalVM native friendly, Jlinkable, and initializes hella fast.

The long term goal of Rainbow Gum is to be a logging framework for all with the only requirement being a modern JDK.

Documentation

• Latest SNAPSHOT RainbowGum doc
• Current released RainbowGum doc

The doc is also on javadoc.io but is not aggregated like the above. The aggregated javadoc is the preferred documentation and the rest of this readme is mainly for propaganda marketing purposes.

For previous releases:

https://jstach.io/doc/rainbowgum/VERSION/apidocs

Where VERSION is the version you want.

Comparison to other frameworks

This section is being rewritten and is a work in progress. Rainbow Gum is ready for production but the marketing is not.

In terms of features and complexity Rainbow Gum aims to be slightly more complicated than slf4j-simple but massively more simple than Log4J 2.

For example in ascending order of complexity/features:

1. slf4j-simple
2. penna
3. rainbowgum
4. reload4j (log4j 1)
5. logback
6. log4j2

Of all the major general purpose logging implementations including Tiny Log, Rainbow Gum is the only one that requires JUST java.base!

(core and not extensions)

• Tiny Log requires the java.sql module.
• Log4J2, Reload4J, and Logback require java.xml module. Logback requires it transitively!
• slf4j-simple and Logback classic requires SLF4J a non JDK module.
• Log4J2 and Tiny Log have their own logging facade API that cannot be removed

What this means is Rainbow Gum can deliver a much smaller executable if packaged with Graal or JLink.

Primary Goals

1. Inititalization speed
2. Configuration is programmatic instead of joran/xml/yaml/properties etc
3. Ability to test newer JDK offerings because of newer design
4. Additional configuration like other outputs can be done by simply adding a runtime dependency.
5. Determine best pratices and provide them for OOB
6. Developer experience is more important than other things (colorful logs)
   • Themes color console output is in the works so you just add a jar get a unique styling.
7. Keep jar size down
8. Graal VM Native works with no special configuration
9. Designed for microservices/cloud/native/lambda instead of monolithic beasts of past.
10. Builtin Fast no dependency JSON support
11. Add a single dependency that works for both development and production for most usages

Consequently:

• It does the right thing OOB like using JAnsi to test for color output and not using synchronized for any IO.
• It starts much faster than logback and log4j (1 and 2)
• It focuses on being programmatically configurable.
• It has zero dependencies (unless using the slf4j bridge)
• It is modularized
• It will use newer features like Virtual threads and Scoped values for MDC

However:

• No external configuration file for out of the box
• It will unlikely do reloading of config. The ability to reload (loggers) adds a lot of bloat and hurts perf.
• It will probably have less configuration and tuning options.
• It will probably not have rolling of files for now. Rolling of files can be handled with other tools and does not make sense for cloud deployments.
  • However reopening files for things like logrotate or retrying / resilience will eventually be supported
• API current will be less stable

Questions

Why not just build ontop of Log4j 2.0 or Logback?

Logback and Log4j 2.0 have complex APIs and offer very little opinion on what should be done OOB.

Both offer complex non-java (xml/properties/yaml) configuration that slows initialization down while increasing security surface area as indictive of log4j 2 shell.

Both are in the realms of megabytes in jar size which may not matter much for traditional java deployments but does matter for Graal VM Native or even plain Hotspot as well as CI pipelines that build uber jars.

Both may not be ready for Loom, Panama, Valhalla, SIMD. Both cannot change API easily as there are numerous libraries that depend on legacy API.

Also Rainbow Gum may provide adapters to use Logback or Log4j core components.

Finally ideas and features of Rainbow Gum could eventually make their way into logback and log4j 2.0.

Someone needs to keep experimenting and pushing forward. The current author of rainbowgum made it so Logback was programmatically configurable many moons ago. We plan on continuing that tradition of bringing what we learn back to the established frameworks.

Why is there no configuration file support?

Because I think this is a fundemental problem with most logging frameworks. It is one of the reasons why they are so bloated and complicated. Let other libraries do configuration and have them run first.

Initialization issues (why no config file cont.)

When logging tries to handle configuration there are initialization issues. Because so many logging frameworks are the first to execute they provide their own configuration framework.

What really should happen is the configuration framework should load first, capture events like warnings or info, and then provide or replay them when the logging framework starts. Libraries that participate in configuration really should not use logging and while SLF4J does provide some form of trampolining (ie queue while initializing) that is not the case for JUL or System logger.

Because many poorly designed configuration libraries needing logging and logging needs configuration in some cases I have seen log4j2 initialize more than 5 times during boot (spring boot) and for logback 3 times (dropwizard).

For configuration library that understands these bootstrapping problems I recommend avaje config or writing your own to load simple properties files. It is a shame there are not more bootstrapping configuration libraries as most configuration really is just Map<String,String>.

Configuration Drift (why no config file cont.)

Configuration stored as files in projects is just asking for different configuration spread across an organization. While it is possible to pack up the files as resources in a shared jar this does not always work in a module-info world as well as GraalVM native as resources files need special considerations.

Profiles and different environments (why no config file cont.)

Because different logging needs are needed for different environments many logging frameworks offer complicated solutions like expression languages and whatever the fuck is "Arbiter" (log4j 2) that could easily be managed with a tiny bit of user Java code.

Solution

In Rainbow gum you do all your configuration in Java and can choose to leverage your existing configuration framework. You write a single service provider using a discoverable API of builders and then package it up in a Jar. It will be graal vm native friendly, initialize hella fast and no configuration drift.