Refactor DefaultLoggingRuleConfigurationBuilder to reduce usage of logback-classic

[linghengqian]

Fixes #32377.

Changes proposed in this pull request:

• Refactor DefaultLoggingRuleConfigurationBuilder to reduce usage of logback-classic. Apparently the adapter for org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder is not in logback-core. It looks like there is no other way. Keep logback-classic in the classpath of shardingsphere jdbc.

SLF4J: Class path contains multiple SLF4J bindings.
SLF4J: Found binding in [jar:file:/home/linghengqian/.m2/repository/org/apache/logging/log4j/log4j-slf4j-impl/2.18.0/log4j-slf4j-impl-2.18.0.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
SLF4J: Found binding in [jar:file:/home/linghengqian/.m2/repository/org/slf4j/slf4j-log4j12/1.7.25/slf4j-log4j12-1.7.25.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
SLF4J: Found binding in [jar:file:/home/linghengqian/.m2/repository/ch/qos/logback/logback-classic/1.2.13/logback-classic-1.2.13.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
SLF4J: See http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#multiple_bindings for an explanation.
SLF4J: Actual binding is of type [org.apache.logging.slf4j.Log4jLoggerFactory]

---

Before committing this PR, I'm sure that I have checked the following options:

• My code follows the code of conduct of this project.
• I have self-reviewed the commit code.
• I have (or in comment I request) added corresponding labels for the pull request.
• I have passed maven check locally : ./mvnw clean install -B -T1C -Dmaven.javadoc.skip -Dmaven.jacoco.skip -e.
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation.
• I have added corresponding unit tests for my changes.

[RaigorJiang]

@linghengqian
The logging rule is actually not finished. It should be like the xa transaction engine, allowing users to choose which logging component to use through SPI.

My idea is to remove the logging rule from the dependency tree, redesign it, and then add it in. Do you think it's okay?

[linghengqian]

@linghengqian
The logging rule is actually not finished. It should be like the xa transaction engine, allowing users to choose which logging component to use through SPI.

My idea is to remove the logging rule from the dependency tree, redesign it, and then add it in. Do you think it's okay?

• I noticed that there is a logging root node in the shardingsphere jdbc YAML node, but it looks like the dependencies are very deep. Maybe the original author of the corresponding function can help remove it? I can't find the corresponding documentation.

[RaigorJiang]

@linghengqian
The logging rule is actually not finished. It should be like the xa transaction engine, allowing users to choose which logging component to use through SPI.
My idea is to remove the logging rule from the dependency tree, redesign it, and then add it in. Do you think it's okay?

• I noticed that there is a logging root node in the shardingsphere jdbc YAML node, but it looks like the dependencies are very deep. Maybe the original author of the corresponding function can help remove it? I can't find the corresponding documentation.

Yes, I will try to communicate with the author.