Ralph, I don't know how to do that either. The best I can do is link my
commits.

https://github.com/shawjef3/logging-log4j2/commits/message-location-release-2.x-squashed?author=shawjef3

And then the scala one has only one commit.
https://github.com/shawjef3/logging-log4j-scala/commit/dd9a5dd2d6bef80ef4f0334c2ed7043299ddbad
<https://github.com/shawjef3/logging-log4j-scala/commit/dd9a5dd2d6bef80ef4f0334c2ed7043299ddbad4>

On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 11:02 PM Ralph Goers <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I am having trouble figuring out how to see only what you have changed.
> GitHub doesn’t seem to want to let me compare your branch against master at
> the point the branch was created. Any ideas?
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Dec 16, 2019, at 8:41 PM, Jeffrey Shaw <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Something I created but didn't push to get included in 2 is the ability
> to
> > hard code source code locations. This is useful in contexts where the
> > compiler can provide them. For instance, Scala's macros can do it. I
> > implemented this intending it to improve performance, since run-time
> stack
> > tracing is no longer necessary.
> >
> >
> https://github.com/shawjef3/logging-log4j2/tree/message-location-release-2.x-squashed
> >
> https://github.com/shawjef3/logging-log4j-scala/tree/message-location-squashed
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 3:34 PM Ralph Goers <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I should point out that a lot of the crappy things we did with
> interfaces
> >> prior to Java 8 can now be undone. Some of it already has been. For
> >> example, ExtendedLogger was added so we could add new methods to the
> Logger
> >> interface. Those can now all be moved to the Logger interface as default
> >> methods. But ExtendedLogger still needs to stick around even if it is an
> >> empty interface as a lot of code references it.  I already did that for
> >> LifeCycle2, MessageFactory2, AbstractMessageFactory and possibly others.
> >>
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Dec 16, 2019, at 1:14 PM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Dec 16, 2019, at 12:59 PM, Raman Gupta <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> What is the point of releasing log4j 3.x if you only intend to make
> >>>> non-breaking changes? Is it just a marketing thing then?
> >>>
> >>> We will be significantly impacting the implementation. We are breaking
> >> up core into smaller modules. Until we upgraded 2.13.0 to Java 8 we had
> >> added stuff to the API that couldn’t be implemented in Java 7. Since
> 2.13.0
> >> is now on Java 8 a lot of the new API stuff has been back ported, so I
> >> don’t expect much difference there.
> >>>
> >>> The main driver for 3.0 was always to break it up so that core didn’t
> >> have so many optional dependencies. That dove-tailed with JPMS in Java
> 9 so
> >> that most of Log4j could be proper JPMS modules.
> >>>
> >>> I have also modified the plugin system to address problems that occur
> >> with JPMS in finding them across modules - the plugin system no longer
> has
> >> a Log4jPlugins.dat file. Instead it generates a class file containing
> the
> >> plugin definitions which is loaded by the ServiceLoader.
> >>>
> >>> So 3.0 really will be a significant change. But it should still support
> >> anything that was compiled against 2.x.
> >>>
> >>> Ralph
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

Reply via email to