Well, yes, but it feels wrong to fatten up the API jar with tooling. I could see adding it in core though, maybe.
Gary On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: > I see what you mean but it seems overkill to create a new module for just > one class... > > > On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I'm not sure if this should be in the API module or any other current >> module since it is a development time thing. I am not a fan of adding yet >> another module (log4j-tools?) but it might be the cleanest way. >> >> Gary >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Remko Popma >> Date:07/06/2014 09:29 (GMT-05:00) >> To: Log4J Developers List >> Subject: custom loggers >> >> I asked this in the LOG4J2-519 comments >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-519?focusedCommentId=14050071&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14050071>, >> but perhaps the mailing list is a better forum... >> >> Does anyone object if I commit the tool to generate custom/extended >> loggers to the org.apache.logging.log4j.util package in the log4j-api >> module? >> >> (For detail see the above Jira comment.) >> > > -- E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] 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
