Re: Towards 3.0 (was Re: Filtering out excessive log payloads)

2020-03-03 Thread Gary Gregory
A different POV I have lately is playing around with a Raspberry Pi, which is a touch more resource constrained than a Windows or Linux box. I am also working on an Arduino project but I can't run Java there. Gary On Tue, Mar 3, 2020, 11:37 Ralph Goers wrote: > Moved to a separate topic since

Re: Towards 3.0 (was Re: Filtering out excessive log payloads)

2020-03-03 Thread Matt Sicker
I'd like to keep log4j-core dependency-free (other than log4j-api of course), so any plugins that only require java.base seem fine to include in core. We'll likely need some optional dependencies for asynchronous logging and such, but simplifying the dependencies here would be great. On Tue, 3

Re: Filtering out excessive log payloads

2020-03-03 Thread Ralph Goers
> On Mar 3, 2020, at 2:12 AM, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > > Hello, > > Given I am done with my JsonTemplateLayout PR and waiting for the > review (I am looking at you Ralph), I promise I will get to this very soon. > I have started working on removing > Jackson dependency. This would allow the

Towards 3.0 (was Re: Filtering out excessive log payloads)

2020-03-03 Thread Ralph Goers
Moved to a separate topic since none of this has much to do with the questions that were asked. > On Mar 3, 2020, at 6:52 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All (I'm back from vacation today): > > For 3.0, my thoughts are that the 'core' should only include infrastructure > used to implement

Re: [log4cxx] Towards a release

2020-03-03 Thread Tobias Frost
On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 04:51:28PM +1100, Stephen Webb wrote: > I would be surprised if any unix distribution would change to 0.11 log4cxx > if its API is incompatible with 0.10. With my Debian maintainer hat on: This is nothing special and day to day businesss with distos: It will "just"

Re: Filtering out excessive log payloads

2020-03-03 Thread Gary Gregory
To be clearer (sorry I was not before), I think we are going to the direction of NOT trying to stuff MORE stuff in the core module, whether that's in 2.x or 3.x. My preference would be to include this kind of new features in new modules so that folks get used to what will hopefully be the norm in

Re: Filtering out excessive log payloads

2020-03-03 Thread Matt Sicker
I think that’s more related to where everything will go in 3.x. There’s no reason we can’t include this in 2.x. Being dependency free qualifies it for core in 2.x at least. On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 08:24 Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > While this feedback is not directly related with my question, I have >

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: Log4j 2 3.x #557

2020-03-03 Thread Matt Sicker
Well that looks like a Maven stacktrace with that sisu library usage. On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 01:38 Apache Jenkins Server < jenk...@builds.apache.org> wrote: > See < > https://builds.apache.org/job/Log4j%202%203.x/557/display/redirect?page=changes > > > > Changes: > > [rgoers] LOG4J2-2779 - Add

Re: Filtering out excessive log payloads

2020-03-03 Thread Volkan Yazıcı
While this feedback is not directly related with my question, I have the impression that you anticipate JsonTemplateLayout to get released with 3.X. If so, that is sort of bad news for me, since I wanted to have it earlier in a 2.X release. Would you mind elaborating on this, please? On Tue, Mar

ApacheCon talk ideas

2020-03-03 Thread Matt Sicker
Considering we’re on track to log4j 3.0 this year, that could certainly make for a talk on its own. Based on the various tracks available this year, is anyone planning to submit a talk or have any suggestions on topics they’d like to see? -- Matt Sicker

Re: Filtering out excessive log payloads

2020-03-03 Thread Matt Sicker
The new config code is all extremely modular. I put it all in the plugins module for now, but it can certainly end up as a stand-alone module. FWIW, I’d love to go with this idea as I’ve wanted something like it since I started working on OSGi integration long ago. On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 07:52

Re: Filtering out excessive log payloads

2020-03-03 Thread Gary Gregory
Hi All (I'm back from vacation today): For 3.0, my thoughts are that the 'core' should only include infrastructure used to implement actual appenders and layouts (and filters and so on.) My experience with the products that use Log4j 1 and 2 at work is: - Use the Console appender by default. -

Filtering out excessive log payloads

2020-03-03 Thread Volkan Yazıcı
Hello, Given I am done with my JsonTemplateLayout PR and waiting for the review (I am looking at you Ralph), I have started working on removing Jackson dependency. This would allow the layout to be included in the core. A major obstacle I encounter is the implementation of the following two

Re: [log4cxx] Towards a release

2020-03-03 Thread Thorsten Schöning
Guten Tag Stephen Webb, am Dienstag, 3. März 2020 um 06:51 schrieben Sie: > As a result of knowing the macros are "blocks", most LOG4CXX_ XXX() code > does not have a trailing semicolon. And that has been unexpacted behaviour in the past and users did wrong, so has been changed. The current