How would such an Encoder look like? On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote:
> It does break binary compatibility, but since it's log4j-core (not api) > we agreed that this is acceptable here. > > The reason it's a separate super interface is that I plan to have other > Encoder implementations (perhaps user-specified) for binary logging. > > The Jira may have more details: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1274 > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2016/04/13, at 5:30, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > > Now that Layout extends Encoder and Encoder is new in 2.6, why not fold > Encoder in Layout? > > Doesn't Layout extending a new type (Encoder) break BC anyway? > > Gary > > -- > 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 > > -- [image: MagineTV] *Mikael Ståldal* Senior software developer *Magine TV* [email protected] Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email.
