A minimal log4j-android-core type of thing could be handy, though I feel
that would be easier to do with the log4j-core modularization I proposed a
while back. We wouldn't want to duplicate plugin code and things like that.

On 5 July 2017 at 15:57, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]> wrote:

> It would also be good if log4j-jul works on Android.
>
> And log4j-jcl (given that commons-logging itself works).
>
> And log4j-slf4j-impl and log4j-to-slf4j (given that SLF4J itself works).
>
>
>
> On 2017-07-05 22:19, Mikael Ståldal wrote:
>
>> I think it is enough with log4j-api support for Android in the 2.9
>> release, we can fix log4j-core (or provide an alternative) later.
>>
>> On 2017-07-05 22:05, Mikael Ståldal wrote:
>>
>>> First of all, we need to make sure that at least log4j-api works
>>> flawlessy on Android. I think this is already covered by
>>> LOG4J2-1926.
>>>
>>> But do we also aim for having log4j-core working on Android? It seems to
>>> me that it could be a lot of work (and possibly force us to remove some
>>> Android-incompatible features like JMX), and maybe not worth it.
>>>
>>> Another option would be to accept and document the fact that log4j-core
>>> does not support Android, and instead create an alternative implementation
>>> which works in Android (likely much smaller and simpler). Possibly with
>>> some Android specific stuff in it (like a LogCat Appender as requested in
>>> LOG4J2-951).
>>>
>>> We have some outstanding tickets about this (some very old):
>>> LOG4J2-461
>>> LOG4J2-728
>>> LOG4J2-951
>>> LOG4J2-1915
>>> LOG4J2-1921
>>>
>>> I tried to label all of them with "Android".
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-07-05 21:29, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>>> An important customer for us is Apache HttpClient for which I already
>>>> switched to Log4j2 in the 5.0 (alpha level) branch. I am on the PMC
>>>> there
>>>> as well. Any help to get Android cooking for Log4j modules would be g r
>>>> e a
>>>> t. I am on deadline at work until the end of the month so my time is
>>>> limited and focused on what I must have.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <[email protected]>

Reply via email to