I'm fine with just the factory methods too.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 2014/06/16, at 9:44, Scott Deboy <scott.de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
>> On Jun 15, 2014 4:05 PM, "Ralph Goers" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>> Do we need the builders? As I said, I prefer only one way for creating
>> plugins.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>>> On Jun 15, 2014, at 2:49 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I see. I agree that the original format is much nicer.
>>>
>>> Matt, do you think you can achieve this with the builders?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On 2014/06/16, at 1:29, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> While you improved some of the existing messages, you really didm’t
>>>> address what I wanted fixed. The previous debug logs would have had
>>>> messages similar to:
>>>>
>>>> Calling createLayout on class
>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.layout.PatternLayout for element
>>>> PatternLayout with params(pattern="%d{HH:mm:ss.SSS} [%t] %-5level
>>>> %logger{36} - %msg%n",
>>>> Configuration(D:\rista\eclipsekws\.metadata\.plugins\org.eclipse.wst.server.core\tmp1\wtpwebapps\log4j2.0-test\WEB-INF\classes\test-log4j.xml),
>>>> null, charset="null", alwaysWriteExceptions="null")
>>>>
>>>> Calling createAppender on class
>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.ConsoleAppender for element Console
>>>> with params(PatternLayout(%d{HH:mm:ss.SSS} [%t] %-5level %logger{36} -
>>>> %msg%n), null, target="SYSTEM_OUT", name="console", follow="null",
>>>> ignoreExceptions="null")
>>>>
>>>> Calling createAppenderRef on class
>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.config.AppenderRef for element appender-ref
>>>> with params(ref="console", level="null", null)
>>>> 2013-09-20 15:06:55,749 DEBUG Calling createLogger on class
>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.config.LoggerConfig$RootLogger for element
>>>> root with params(additivity="null", level="error", includeLocation="null",
>>>> AppenderRef={console}, Properties={},
>>>> Configuration(D:\rista\eclipsekws\.metadata\.plugins\org.eclipse.wst.server.core\tmp1\wtpwebapps\log4j2.0-test\WEB-INF\classes\test-log4j.xml),
>>>> null)
>>>>
>>>> The current log emits stuff like:
>>>>
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,432 DEBUG Building Plugin[name=layout,
>>>> class=org.apache.logging.log4j.core.layout.XmlLayout]. Searching for
>>>> builder factory method...
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,435 DEBUG No builder factory method found in class
>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.layout.XmlLayout.
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,435 DEBUG Still building Plugin[name=layout,
>>>> class=org.apache.logging.log4j.core.layout.XmlLayout]. Searching for
>>>> factory method...
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,436 DEBUG Found factory method [createLayout]: public
>>>> static org.apache.logging.log4j.core.layout.XmlLayout
>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.layout.XmlLayout.createLayout(boolean,boolean,boolean,boolean,java.nio.charset.Charset).
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,436 DEBUG Generating parameters for factory method
>>>> [createLayout]...
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,456 DEBUG Attribute(locationInfo="false") - no value
>>>> specified, using default.
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,456 DEBUG Attribute(properties="false") - no value
>>>> specified, using default.
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,457 DEBUG Attribute(complete="true") - no value
>>>> specified, using default.
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,457 DEBUG Attribute(compact="false") - no value
>>>> specified, using default.
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,457 DEBUG Attribute(charset="UTF-8") - no value
>>>> specified, using default.
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,587 DEBUG Built Plugin[name=layout] OK from factory
>>>> method.
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,588 DEBUG Building Plugin[name=appender,
>>>> class=org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.FileAppender]. Searching for
>>>> builder factory method...
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,588 DEBUG No builder factory method found in class
>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.FileAppender.
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,589 DEBUG Still building Plugin[name=appender,
>>>> class=org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.FileAppender]. Searching for
>>>> factory method...
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,589 DEBUG Found factory method [createAppender]:
>>>> public static org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.FileAppender
>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.FileAppender.createAppender(java.lang.String,java.lang.String,java.lang.String,java.lang.String,java.lang.String,java.lang.String,java.lang.String,java.lang.String,org.apache.logging.log4j.core.Layout,org.apache.logging.log4j.core.Filter,java.lang.String,java.lang.String,org.apache.logging.log4j.core.config.Configuration).
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,589 DEBUG Generating parameters for factory method
>>>> [createAppender]...
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,595 DEBUG
>>>> Attribute(fileName="target/XmlCompleteFileAppenderTest.log")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,596 DEBUG Attribute(append="false")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,596 DEBUG Attribute(locking="null")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,596 DEBUG Attribute(name="XmlFile")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,597 DEBUG Attribute(immediateFlush="false")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,597 DEBUG Attribute(ignoreExceptions="null")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,597 DEBUG Attribute(bufferedIo="null")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,598 DEBUG Attribute(bufferSize="null")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,598 DEBUG
>>>> XMLLayout(org.apache.logging.log4j.core.layout.XmlLayout@5eef9f84)
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,598 DEBUG Attribute(advertise="null")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,599 DEBUG Attribute(advertiseUri="null")
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,599 DEBUG
>>>> Configuration(/Users/rgoers/projects/apache/logging/log4j/log4j2/trunk/log4j-core/target/test-classes/XmlCompleteFileAppenderTest.xml)
>>>> 2014-06-15 09:07:19,601 DEBUG Starting FileManager
>>>> target/XmlCompleteFileAppenderTest.log
>>>>
>>>> The previous format was a lot more compact as it essentially showed you
>>>> the parameters being passed to the factory method in one line while
>>>> identifying the class it came from and the configuration element that
>>>> triggered it. The new log emits that info as individual lines with a few
>>>> messages that are just noise.
>>>>
>>>> Ralph
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 14, 2014, at 10:11 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I've done some work on this, there may be more places to improve, I
>>>>> mainly focused on PluginBuilder and PluginAttributeVisitor.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 2:09 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Yeah, I liked the prettier logging format. I was planning to add it back
>>>>>> in, but it appears as though I completely forgot about it! The "new"
>>>>>> format was a quick placeholder. I'll try and work on that this week.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10 June 2014 19:47, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Maybe Matt can shed a light on this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Ralph Goers <rgo...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I don't know exactly what I would be vetoing. I have no problem with
>>>>>>>> some of the refactoring. The commit(s) that changed the logging
>>>>>>>> probably happened weeks ago and I am just noticing now.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But yes, I want the logging aspect of the changes reverted back to
>>>>>>>> what was previously being done.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 10, 2014, at 5:34 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well, for Log4j Plugins, one way to configure should be plenty. I am
>>>>>>>>> OK with the factory method pattern, while it makes for some long
>>>>>>>>> signatures, I like that it is all in one place.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> May I suggest a simple "-1" reply on the ML on the changes to
>>>>>>>>> logging? Do you feel a VETO is inappropriate here?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Ralph Goers <rgo...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I think the discussion was not on its own thread. I thought there
>>>>>>>>>> was agreement that there should be only one way to configure
>>>>>>>>>> plugins. I prefer the factory method simply because it would be a
>>>>>>>>>> whole lot of effort to convert everything to a builder and I just
>>>>>>>>>> don't think the benefit is worth the effort.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I spent a lot of time making the debug output "nice" and easily
>>>>>>>>>> understandable so I am a bit upset that it was tossed and replaced
>>>>>>>>>> with what you see below.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 10, 2014, at 4:31 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Ralph Goers
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I am working on a new Appender and am noticing that the debug
>>>>>>>>>>>> output is now far less useful than it used to be. I used to see
>>>>>>>>>>>> the factory method being invoked with all of its parameters very
>>>>>>>>>>>> nicely formatted. Now I see
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,858 DEBUG No compatible method annotated with
>>>>>>>>>>>> interface
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.config.plugins.PluginBuilderFactory
>>>>>>>>>>>> found in class class
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.web.appender.ServletAppender.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,858 DEBUG Found factory method class
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.web.appender.ServletAppender.public
>>>>>>>>>>>> static org.apache.logging.log4j.web.appender.ServletAppender
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.web.appender.ServletAppender.createAppender(org.apache.logging.log4j.core.Layout,org.apache.logging.log4j.core.Filter,java.lang.String,java.lang.String).
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,864 DEBUG Constructing plugin of type class
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.web.appender.ServletAppender
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,864 DEBUG PatternLayout(%m%n)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,864 DEBUG Constructing plugin of type class
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.web.appender.ServletAppender
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,865 DEBUG Constructing plugin of type class
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.web.appender.ServletAppender
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,865 DEBUG Attribute(name="Servlet")
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,865 DEBUG Constructing plugin of type class
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.web.appender.ServletAppender
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,865 DEBUG Null string given to convert. Using
>>>>>>>>>>>> default [null].
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-06-10 16:02:37,866 DEBUG Attribute(ignoreExceptions="null")
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is far more verbose, repetitive, and is nowhere near as clear
>>>>>>>>>>>> as it used to be.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you please get the logging output back to the old format?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, can we change PatternLayout back to a factory and remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>> message about no builder factory being present?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think we need to decide how many ways there are to configure a
>>>>>>>>>>> plugin: factory, builder, and whatever else we've been discussing.
>>>>>>>>>>> This is getting quite confusing!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I thought we had a thread going on the topic already...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> 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>
