[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14521679#comment-14521679
]
Gary Gregory commented on LOG4J2-997:
-------------------------------------
True, unless the class extends {{AbstractFilterable}}.
If we really want to clean this up and we are that worried about BC for filters
in the core module, then we can go the {{Filterable2 extends Filterable}} route.
I'm more adventurous ;-) I suppose. My path would be, release 2.3 (with or
without a fix), POLL the user and dev list, review.
> removeFilter() in AbstractFilterable does not remove filter
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LOG4J2-997
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-997
> Project: Log4j 2
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 2.2
> Reporter: Maytee Chinavanichkit
>
> Add two filters to a class that implements AbstractFilterable. Try to remove
> one of the two filters; nothing is removed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
