Hi Les,
Thank you for considering making a contribution to the logback
project. The modularization scheme for logback extensions you propose
sounds quite reasonable. However, I should mention that logback is
already split by logging event type (logback-access, logback-classic)
with logback-core providing shared code, applying the
core/classic/access separation to the modularization scheme for
logback extensions, we could end up in 18 (=3x6) modules
(core/access/classic x extensions/json/commmon/groovy/jackson/loggly/).
If logback-classic is the only target for logback-extensions, this
combinatorial problem obviously does not apply. To keep things
simple, we could ignore logback-access and concentrate on extending
only logback-classic.
More importantly though, I personally cannot and do not wish to commit
to the maintenance of logback-extensions. Thus, I would prefer to
support logback-extensions as a separate project as far as the code is
concerned. However, at the web-site level (http://logback.qos.ch), the
two projects could be integrated by allowing you to manage on your own
the branch under say http://logback.qos.ch/extensions/.
Thoughts?
--
Ceki
http://twitter.com/#!/ceki
On 08.03.2012 20:40, Les Hazlewood wrote:
Hi Ceki (et. al),
I'm trying to wrap my head around making it easy to add and support
contributions/extensions to logback in a clean/modular way. For
example, I'd like to see a JSON formatter and a Loggly appender added
to Logback.
However, these additions probably don't make sense to be added to
logback core/classic as they would bloat the library for those not
using these features. As such, it makes sense (to me at least) to
have a more modular source code organization where different
features/extensions are represented as a dedicated Maven module. This
way, people can easily (and deterministically) use a respective
dependency depending on the feature they wish to enable. Clean and
easy.
Now, with regards to a JSON formatter and a Loggly appender (which
would likely use the JSON formatter), I'd envision something like this
in the Logback source tree:
logback/
logback-access/
logback-classic/
logback-core/
...
logback-extensions/
Where 'logback-extensions' is a new Maven module. It would just be a
wrapper module containing children. Below it, you might see the
following:
logback-extensions/
json/
common/
groovy/
jackson/
loggly/
foo/
bar/
...
In the above example, the logback-json module: 1) provides a 'common'
sub module where JSON-specific needs are defined, and 2) has other
sub-modules depending on _how_ you want JSON to be formatted.
You can depend on the logback-json-jackson dependency if you want to
use Jackson, or you can depend on logback-json-groovy if you want to
use the built-in JSON support in a Groovy 1.8+ environment.
The 'loggly' extension could depend on logback-json-common.
The idea is that you can depend on a dependency that is copacetic with
your intended runtime environment. I think this makes a lot of sense
- we use it in Apache Shiro
(http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shiro/trunk/support/) and it works
very well for us.
Before I go off and create my own 'logback-extensions' project on
GitHub, I'd rather contribute this back to Logback proper as a pull
request if this is something you are willing to implement.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
_______________________________________________
logback-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-dev
