[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-978?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14368770#comment-14368770
]
Remko Popma edited comment on LOG4J2-978 at 3/19/15 10:14 AM:
--------------------------------------------------------------
So the problem is how to push a config change to 100s of boxes?
And programmatic configuration means that any config change is part of the
binary you release, which avoids modifying config files outside the release
binary?
(Sorry, still trying to work out what the benefit is of programmatic
configuration versus a single config file.)
was (Author: [email protected]):
So the problem is how to push a config change to 100s of boxes?
And programmatic configuration means that any config change is part of the
binary you release, which avoids modifying config files outside the release
binary?
> log4j2 2.2 made breaking changes to public classes
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LOG4J2-978
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-978
> Project: Log4j 2
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.2
> Reporter: Daniel Norberg
>
> The log4j2 2.2 release contained breaking changes to public classes, breaking
> direct uses and extenders of log4j2 interfaces.
> E.g.
> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/commit/3cdbbeddf19137d20fa6527d6620e88afcecb7f9
> Here is an example of the impact of this breaking change:
> https://github.com/spotify/logging-java/commit/3d2ca1c31a8ca3eabe1db378e2df48e0757e80e7
> Does log4j2 aim to follow semantic versioning? I am currently looking into
> the feasibility of taking log4j2 into use instead of logback, but this will
> not be possible if log4j2 will be having further breaking changes in minor
> releases.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
