Hi Ralph,
On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 at 19:00, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> The enhancement you suggest would make the properties configuration different
> than
> the other configuration formats as they all require the Filters element. This
> is yet another
> example of why most (or all) of the log4j 2 developers really do not like the
> properties
> format and wonder why so many people prefer it.
Yes, you are right, no need to introduce exceptions. Even if there is
only one filter, a property
logger.logger-id.filter.filter-id.type = ThresholdFilter
should be equivalent to:
<Loggers>
<Logger ...>
<Filters>
<ThresholdFilter .../>
Right now the `PropertiesConfigurationBuilder` does not add the
"Filters" component, so the property above gives the equivalent of:
<Loggers>
<Logger ...>
<ThresholdFilter .../>
This works, but fails if the user configures more than one filter (as
it would in every configuration format). BTW, I think that a property:
logger.logger-id.filter-id.type = ThresholdFilter
should also work to define a single filter. Right now it is ignored by
the `PropertiesConfigurationBuilder`.
I would go even further, regarding the properties format: no Log4j2
developer uses it and that explains why there are still many bugs in
the `PropertiesConfiguration`.
Piotr
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
