Hi Piotr, It seems odd to have a logger name not supported in a configuration file but then support it programmatically. Did I misread your suggestion? If that's the case, then issuing a warning makes even more sense.
I don't want to not loose support for "root" (lower-case) in the Log4j 1 configuration properties bridge since that's a documented feature in 1.x. I still have a product that uses 1.x style properties files, and converting converting our installed user's product files is not a task anyone wants to do (same for the files in our test suites). In summary: - I still like the idea of a deprecation warning - Don't break 1.x configuration files HTH, Gary [1] https://logging.apache.org/log4j/1.x/manual.html On 2024/11/19 15:10:50 "Piotr P. Karwasz" wrote: > Hi Gary, > > On 19.11.2024 13:08, Gary Gregory wrote: > > This seems like a nice clean up that will break a lot of configurations. > > > > How about we issue a warning in 2.x like "The logger name 'root' is > > deprecated and will be removed in 3.0"? > > I thought about going in the other direction: allow users to call > `Configurator.setLevel("ROOT", Level.INFO)`. > > It is unlikely that "ROOT" will collide with any real logger. > > Piotr > >
