Per LOGBACK-262 [1], logback does not conform to ISO8601 when printing
%d{ISO8601}. We're in the process of fixing this [2], but we'd like to
maintain backward compatibility for log parsers that might rely on the
incorrect format. We have a couple options.
OPTION 1. Add a new option for %d that enables the legacy incorrect format.
Deprecate it, and remove it after several releases. Examples:
%d{ISO8601_OLD}
%d{NOT8601}
%d{OLD8601}
%d{ISO8601,,old}
other?
OPTION 2. Force users to specify a custom date format that matches the
legacy incorrect format:
%d{"yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss,SSS"}
Please provide feedback on these options (or a new one) by June 23.
I would go for option one. Here is why:
Make a pattern name HUMAN_ISO8601 to avoid people writing the pattern
over again like in option two. The NO_T is valid as long as there is a
mutual agreement among the participating parties. I have access to all
ISO documents at work and can provide a citation (chapter, verbatim,
etc.) if needed.
Michael
_______________________________________________
logback-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-dev
