Golden!
On 3 June 2014 12:20, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> 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
>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>> 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
>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>> 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
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
>
>
--
Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
