Matt, Unless you are creating an issue to immediately fix a bug, can you please have the description state what the problem or issue is? You can then either add a subsequent comment or start another paragraph in the description with a heading of “Proposed Solution”. I like to be able to understand what the issue is that needs to be solved without having to infer it by reading the description to the possible solution.
Ralph On Apr 24, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Matt Sicker (JIRA) <j...@apache.org> wrote: > Matt Sicker created LOG4J2-614: > ---------------------------------- > > Summary: Log4j API should allow specifying a LoggerContextFactory > at runtime. > Key: LOG4J2-614 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-614 > Project: Log4j 2 > Issue Type: Bug > Components: API, Core > Affects Versions: 2.0-rc2 > Reporter: Matt Sicker > Priority: Blocker > > > The initialization code in LogManager will need to be refactored. The > presence of a LoggerContextFactory implementation may not be available at the > same time log4j-api is started. Thus, LogManager can shortcut to using > SimpleContextFactory by default and then allow that to be overridden. This is > currently a private static final field; I believe that it would be a better > idea to use a sort of atomic reference pattern here (or volatile?). I'm not > sure which way would be the fastest, but it shouldn't be final (I don't want > to use reflection to force a different LoggerContextFactory like I'm doing > for the JUL bridge I'm working on). > > In this scenario, it might be useful for the Loggers and LoggerContexts > returned by SimpleContextFactory to be proxy classes so that they use > whatever the active logger provider is. This way, if a client gets a Logger > before log4j-core is activated, it can still use the proper logging objects. > I don't know how much this affects performance, but java.util.logging uses a > similar strategy for its loggers before java.util.logging.LogManager is > initialized. > > Anyway, the main thing to do this here for is to allow all the other log4j > JARs to not have to be fragments. This will allow for more robust OSGi > integration and support in log4j-core later on (e.g., registering plugins > through the OSGi service registry). It might also aid in some neat Spring > integration, too (i.e., the ability to configure your loggers and appenders > and such through Spring), but that's a separate idea. > > > > -- > This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA > (v6.2#6252) > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
