The JSON format supports two formats similar to how the XML does. The format
you prefer is supported
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 3, 2014, at 9:16 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 1. I liked AbstractLogger better, too.
> 2. Let's do that single transferable vote thing over the ML instead of STEVE.
> 3. I was saying that log4j2's configuration file formats are far superior to
> any others I've seen out there.
> 4. If there's any way to improve the config file format, it might be in the
> JSON/YAML versions, but I haven't really looked at those closely at all. But
> an example might be that I'd like to use something like:
>
> "appenders": [
> "console": { ... attributes ... },
> ... other appenders
> ]
>
> And not something like
>
> "appenders": [
> "appender": {
> ... attributes
> },
> "appender": {
> ... more attributes
> }
> ]
>
> Basically, make it natural like the XML config is.
>
>
>> On 3 June 2014 03:29, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Perhaps we should put a message on the site "we're unable to select a new
>> logo, so log4j-2.0 will not be G.A. for the foreseeable future". :-P
>> (Just kidding.)
>>
>> About LoggerProvider, I liked having the extra methods to be able to
>> extend/wrap Loggers, but I also don't like the name very much.
>>
>> I hesitate to propose this as I agree with Ralph's main point that I think
>> our time would be better spent fixing outstanding Jiras than renaming and
>> refactoring stuff that already works fine, but here goes:
>>
>> How about:
>> 1. LoggerProvider -> ExtendedLogger,
>> AbstractLoggerProvider -> AbstractExtendedLogger
>> 2. Move all methods from LoggerProvider into Logger and remove
>> LoggerProvider,
>> AbstractLoggerProvider -> AbstractLogger
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On 2014/06/03, at 16:12, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, let's talk about it! I find some of these typs names confusing and
>>> the javadocs could be better. Better names will help us. Names are
>>> important to communicate clearly what our _intentions_ are.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original message --------
>>> From: Ralph Goers
>>> Date:06/03/2014 02:38 (GMT-05:00)
>>> To: Log4J Developers List
>>> Subject: Re: Config clean up for AppenderRef
>>>
>>> We are never going to release 2.0. A few of you keep wanting to
>>> continually refactor and rename stuff is making things worse in my opinion.
>>> As I have said before, a good example is that I find AbstractLogger to be
>>> a much better name than AbstractLoggerProvider and think it was a mistake
>>> to rename it, but I didn't speak up fast enough when it happened. We have
>>> over 100 Jira issues that I would think would be far more productive to
>>> address then these silly refactoring and renaming excercises.
>>>
>>> Just leave the configuration syntax alone.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>> On Jun 2, 2014, at 10:48 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 11:54 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I wish everyone on the team would think of these things more in terms of
>>>>> trade-offs.
>>>>> What is the cost/benefit analysis of this change?
>>>>>
>>>>> Plus: one or two people on the team like this name better from an
>>>>> aesthetical point of view (I don't see any functional benefit). That gets
>>>>> some points, but not as many as a functional improvement would get.
>>>>>
>>>>> Minus: it breaks the configuration of existing users. That's a lot of
>>>>> minus points to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Times the number of affected people (both plus and minus)...
>>>>>
>>>>> And why are we even talking about this?
>>>>
>>>> Because I am a volunteer and I care about some things more than others, if
>>>> other folks don't, that's fine too.
>>>>
>>>> Look at this as a trade-off of working in a FOSS environment ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Also, for a new major version, everything matters. This is really more
>>>> like a version 1.0 of the reboot of a classic franchise. IMO, everything
>>>> deserves special care as we'll have to live with it for a long time.
>>>>
>>>> This is why I've not been pushing for a release. I'd like to know as much
>>>> of the code as possible. Check out all the nooks and crannies.
>>>>
>>>> I have great respect for the work Ralph has put in, it is a tremendous
>>>> effort of high quality. But, it does not mean that it cannot benefit from
>>>> reviews, spit, and polish.
>>>>
>>>> I think the community has grown and sees people come and go (where is Nick
>>>> Williams BTW ;-) It is nice that we can benefit from various talents in
>>>> different areas. We should take advantage of it all.
>>>>
>>>> I like the enthusiasm and work that Matt has recently put in for example.
>>>> We've got a lot of talented people, let's take advantage of these
>>>> volunteers and let them all flourish.
>>>>
>>>> Sure we might end up with more features, bells and whistles than are
>>>> strictly needed, but hopefully and so far, the software is that much the
>>>> better for it. And yes, we should all keep a diligent eye toward speed and
>>>> memory, and all the usual good that comes from peer reviews.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2014/06/03, at 10:28, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hm, why not adopt the same convention as Ant? It would be nicer IMO:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <File id="MyAppender />
>>>>>> <AppenderRef refid="MyAppender />
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Both attributes have "id" in their name so the connection is more
>>>>>> obvious.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Ralph Goers <rgo...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> I think I agree with Remko. I think ref= is clearer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jun 2, 2014, at 1:48 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hm, not sure. Two things:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That would require our existing users to modify their configurations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, currently the "name" attribute provides an identifier for its
>>>>>>>> element so that other elements can reference it. Isn't it clearer to
>>>>>>>> have a different attribute when referring to another element? I think
>>>>>>>> calling this attribute "ref" is very clear actually and I don't think
>>>>>>>> having the same name for attributes that refer and attributes
>>>>>>>> attributes that are being referred to is better.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2014/06/02, at 15:46, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In the following:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <File name="File" fileName="${filename}">
>>>>>>>>> <PatternLayout>
>>>>>>>>> <Pattern>${pattern}</Pattern>
>>>>>>>>> </PatternLayout>
>>>>>>>>> </File>
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> <Loggers>
>>>>>>>>> <Root level="Debug">
>>>>>>>>> <AppenderRef ref="File" />
>>>>>>>>> </Root>
>>>>>>>>> </Loggers>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I propose to change:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <AppenderRef ref="File" />
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> to:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <AppenderRef name="File" />
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It seems easier to read and connect these dots:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <File name="File"
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> <AppenderRef name="File" />
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>>>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>>>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action
>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action
>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>>>> Spring Batch in Action
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
