http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANSI_escape_code

It adds some extras character that you'll see if the console doesn't
support it

---------
Arnaud

Le 8 déc. 2012 à 11:03, Chris Graham <chrisgw...@gmail.com> a écrit :

I'd like to know how it is implemented and what happens when it is run on a
terminal that does not support it.

-Chris

Sent from my iPhone

On 08/12/2012, at 8:54 AM, Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>
wrote:

+1 from me


On Friday, 7 December 2012, Jesse McConnell wrote:


I sure hope colored logging is off by default, I hate it :)


--

jesse mcconnell

jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com <javascript:;>




On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Stephen Connolly <

stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:


I am -1 on coloured logger in 3.1.0 though given the number of commits to

core coming from me I am fine to state this is not a veto rather a very

strong preference.


I am fine with proofing the coloured logger changes before releasing

3.1.0

to ensure that we have logging right but in my view user visible changes

make API changes more solid so I am less keen to couple them.


The logging changes are big enough for a separate release. I think users

will thank us for being cautious before putting coloured logging on top


My €0.02


- Stephen


On Friday, 7 December 2012, Robert Scholte wrote:


It's not about rush, it is about touching the Logging Framework while

for

the majority of the end-users it won't make that much of a difference.

I'm thinking what would make it interesting for me as an end-user to

use

this next release (apart from the bugfixes). We could already log and

control the logging-level. Now colors would make it more interesting,

even

if we could provide it as an extension (not part of core), as long as

it

works.

Sure, for the specialists these changes offer new opportunities, but

that's a small group.


Robert


Op Fri, 07 Dec 2012 21:18:50 +0100 schreef Jason van Zyl <

ja...@tesla.io

:



On Dec 7, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Robert Scholte <rfscho...@apache.org>

wrote:


If 3.1.0 is going to be the "New Logger"-release, I'd prefer to

include

the colored logger as well.



I'm not putting it in the release because I'm not, without discussion


1) Putting 3 logging implementations into the distribution


or


2) Putting an immature logging implementation as the default


Not something to be taken lightly and it's been 11 months at this point

so

what's the rush?


That would make it more complete. Also, if coloring would require

extra

adjustments to the logging framework then now is the time. (it seems to

work out of the box, but we have to be sure.)



Robert



Op Fri, 07 Dec 2012 15:04:13 +0100 schreef Benson Margulies <

bimargul...@gmail.com>:


As I see it, the vote bogged down because Kristian found problems, and

I haven't seen clear evidence that those problems are sorted out. I'd

be happy to vote +1 with respect to all the design questions for the

release 'as is'.


On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>

wrote:


good idea, Benson.


Btw, this VOTE did not get enough +1 in more than a week. And this is

not

because not enough people took care if you look at the plenty of

comments

in the thread.


1.) Do people have any technical comment on my proposal to introduce a

new

plugin-plugin flag for exposing slf4j? Is there any technical problem

with

that?


Are there other proposals which might help increasing backward

compatibility?




2.) what about the coloured logger with log4j2? I tried it locally and

it

worked great. What is the status? (Sorry if I missed something)




LieGrue,

strub




----- Original Message -----


From: Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com>

To: Maven Developers List <


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Reply via email to