Patch looks nice. Much fewer "raw type" compiler warnings. Seems like a big improvement to me.
A small improvement on the patch would be to remove the (now unnecessary) @param <T> javadoc comments. I have that additional change done in my local workspace. I wouldn't mind committing this but I don't want to disrupt anyone's work-in-progress: the patch modifies about 125 files. Is everyone ok with me committing this? I'll hold off for a day or two (or less if we're all ok with this). Remko On Monday, August 12, 2013, Ralph Goers wrote: > I've briefly glanced at your patch and it looks reasonable to me. It > leaves the Layout to continue to use generics but removes the generics from > the Appenders. That seems like a reasonable thing to do. > > Ralph > > On Aug 11, 2013, at 6:34 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: > > Ok, that makes a lot of sense. I have reworked the patch to leave these > alone and put it on a different git branch. I also opened a ticket: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-343 and attached it as a > patch so that if you do not want to deal with git, you can get it from > there. > > I added instructions on how to get the patch from git to the ticket. > > > On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Nick Williams < > [email protected] <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', > '[email protected]');>> wrote: > >> >> On Aug 10, 2013, at 6:31 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I was toying with the log4j 2 API for a new project and I stumbled over >> the fact that it uses a generic for Appender<T> without actually being >> generic. The only generic part is the Layout. So as a result there is this >> weird construct of Appender<SomeSerializableType> which is actually >> dictated by the layout in use. >> >> >> I'm relatively new to the team, so I don't know much about the reasoning >> behind making Appender generic, so I can't speak to that. I'm not >> personally opposed to removing these generics, but that is a HUGE change. >> >> This leads to really interesting constructs such as >> >> public abstract class AbstractDatabaseAppender<T extends >> AbstractDatabaseManager> extends AbstractAppender<LogEvent> >> >> >> Well this is a very different case. The <LogEvent> here is about Layout, >> just as you said. The <T extends AbstractDatabaseManager> is completely >> unrelated to Layout and I am _not_ in favor of removing these generics. >> >> I was wondering whether this is necessary as it makes the API very >> cumbersome to use and read so I removed the generic from Appender and >> subsequently went through the log4j 2 code base and mostly removed stuff >> that was no longer needed once that was gone. The result is at >> >> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/1 >> >> >> The Apache GitHub repository is just a mirror of our SVN repository. We >> can't accept or use any pull requests there. You need to generate an SVN >> patch and attach it to whatever JIRA you create. (As such, you should close >> this pull request.) >> >> I will also file a JIRA for this. >> >> I know that the 2.0 release should be coming soon (being at beta8), but I >> feel that making that change in the API before it is set in stone with 2.0 >> woulc be really beneficial for anyone who wants to port code to 2.0 / write >> new code. >> >> >> I'm sure there will be plenty of discussion about this over the next few >> days. >> >> Thanks for considering, >> Henning >> >> >> Nick >> > > >
