Hi, I think also that, the fragment approach is the better one. Eclipse-BuddyPolicy is Equinox specific and deprecated, the generic OSGi pendant is Bundle-BuddyPolicy.
> BTW, an interesting feature would be supporting multiple logback.xml > "fragments", i.e. handle (merge?) appenders/logger configuration from > multiple buddies/fragments/applications. Hm, interessant thought ... logger/appender naming conflics could be resolved by enhancing names with plugin/fragments ids. Christian 2012/7/10 Gunnar Wagenknecht <[email protected]>: > Am 10.07.2012 14:10, schrieb ceki: >> OSGi bundles still need a way to pass logback-classic a configuration >> file. Several technical for achieving this are explained by Libor >> Jelinek at [1]. I think logback-classic should support Eclipse buddy >> policy. Would you have any objections if I added >> "Eclipse-BuddyPolicy: registered" to logback-classic.jar's MANIFEST ? > > Supporting it does no harm. It's Equinox specific, though. Thus, I'd > recommend the fragment approach. > > BTW, an interesting feature would be supporting multiple logback.xml > "fragments", i.e. handle (merge?) appenders/logger configuration from > multiple buddies/fragments/applications. > > -Gunnar > > -- > Gunnar Wagenknecht > [email protected] > http://wagenknecht.org/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > logback-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-dev _______________________________________________ logback-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-dev
