On Feb 22, 2010, at 2:22 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > Well, I've finally begun doing some coding this weekend although I haven't > gotten awfully far. I am definitely going to be using the Message interface. > There were some lengthy discussions on the Logback list about this topic and > the problems using an Object introduces for applications like Lillith or > Chainsaw where the Object has to be passed to a remote system. Often > serialization fails miserably and toString often yields unsatisfying results. > It also requires the remote application to have the Classes in the class path > for the objects being sent to it to be able to deserialize the events, which > can be a pain for a general purpose logging reporting application. > > Ralph >
Please log the issues that you see with using Object as the message parameter as JIRA issues with links to the logback discussion threads. It would document the motivation behind a design decision, or allow satisfying those requirements through a different means. On serialization, it seems like you are anticipating preventing log4j's capability to send arbitrary classes over the wire. While it can be problematic, it can also be used properly. Please start a directory off http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/log4j/branches/BRANCH_2_0_EXPERIMENTAL for this work. We want to avoid having a whole bunch of code hit the SVN repo in a "finished" state. Please describe your approach, goals, scope to the list. Do you have critiques of the earlier work in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/sandbox/experimental/pattern-layout? I should move that over to BRANCH_2_0_EXPERIMENTAL. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
