I'm sorry, Log4J has been a waste of time for me. I think I'm going to
find something else or code my own thing. The improvements you've made
are actually regressions for me. I should not have interfered.
My apologies for having been here. I guess I wasted everyone's time.
Regards, and cya.
B.
On 09/13/2015 01:06 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
So here we are WRT programmatic configuration, users' options are:
- The new builder API. Most flexible, not 100% type-safe, a typo in a
property name can mess you up.
- The sprinkling of Builder classes. Easy to code against (fluent),
type-safe, a bit brittle but less so than factory methods (order of
calls does not patter like method param order does).
- The factory methods. Most difficult to code against (long param list),
most brittle.
My questions:
- Should we remove Builder classes?
- Should we replace factory methods with Builder classes? Seems like a
lot of work.
- Should we accept/encourage contributors to submit Builder patches?
Right now, I kind of want 2.4 out ASAP and see what people use.
Thoughts?
Gary
--
E-Mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> |
[email protected] <mailto:[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 <http://garygregory.wordpress.com/>
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
