Hi Remko, On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 at 14:04, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 1. Configuration has properties related to async logging: > `asyncLoggerConfigDelegate` and `asyncWaitStrategyFactory`. These > should be removed before the split, but I don't know what would be the > right way to do it. > > How would that work? > Will Log4j 3 configurations be incompatible with Log4j 2 configurations? > (Remember we had many complaints about that from users migrating from 1 to 2…) > > Shouldn’t this be such that a configuration containing Async elements only > works when the Async module is in the classpath? > (Which begs the question: how should it fail when this isn’t the case? > Ideally give a helpful error message specifying how users can fix the > problem.)
I think it could work the same way as with a missing `log4j-jdbc` or `log4j-smtp`: `AsyncLoggerConfig` and `AsyncWaitStrategyFactoryConfig` are plugins, the DI system will warn users if it does not know such plugins. The tricky part is to modify `AbstractConfiguration` to accept any reasonable plugin as a direct subcomponent. We could either: * do what was done in `log4j-script`: we leave enough interfaces in `log4j-core` so that we can keep async-specific stuff in `AbstractConfiguration`, * or solve this in a more general way by introducing a marker `ConfigurationExtension` interface and allow all plugins that implement it to be direct children of the configuration. Piotr
