Right. Like, the compatible API version in log4j-api are what versions of
the API it still supports, while the API version in a provider is the
minimum version it needs.
On 8 October 2014 22:51, Ralph Goers wrote:
> OK. So you are saying that the 2.1 impl can only run with the 2.1 API but
> the
OK. So you are saying that the 2.1 impl can only run with the 2.1 API but the
API can run with a 2.0 or 2.1 impl. Yes, I guess that makes sense.
I was expecting something more along the lines of something being added to the
API that required a corresponding change to the impl. That would not
Oh, and nothing was removed from the 2.0 API, so it's really backwards
compatible (even a random protected method from util). I would imagine a
backwards incompatible API change would warrant 3.0, but maybe I'm just
confused?
On 8 October 2014 22:23, Matt Sicker wrote:
> There are additions to t
There are additions to the API in 2.1 that log4j-core use (e.g., several
things added to util), so I figured it made sense to mark log4j-core as
requiring log4j-api 2.1+. Isn't that the point?
I also left the log4j-to-slf4j API version at 2.0.0 since that's still
compatible with the 2.0 API.
On 8
Also, if the API does not change then the version number does not need to be
bumped even though we have moved on to 2.2, 2.3, etc. So if nothing really
changed to the API in 2.1 the version number can be left at 2.0.0.
Ralph
On Oct 8, 2014, at 8:05 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> Yes, I am aware of
Yes, I am aware of that. I believe I wrote the code. As I said, the
implication of the current setting is that the API will can bind with either a
2.0.0 implementation or a 2.1.0 implementation and will work fine. If the API
was changed for 2.1 in such a way that that is true then fine. But i
ProviderUtil.validVersion(String) checks all the values from
COMPATIBLE_API_VERSIONS for compatibility, not just one. For reference:
private static final String[] COMPATIBLE_API_VERSIONS = {
"2.0.0", "2.1.0"
};
private static boolean validVersion(final String version) {
Log4j API is trying to bind with an implementation. It wants to bind only with
an implementation that is compatible with the API. To my understanding that
would mean it can only bind with a 2.1.0 implementation.
Ralph
On Oct 8, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> I believe this means that
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-870?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14164358#comment-14164358
]
Matt Sicker commented on LOG4J2-870:
Take a look at this: http://logging.apache.org/lo
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-870?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14164265#comment-14164265
]
Sudhakar commented on LOG4J2-870:
-
Thanks! I would like to ask you another question. What
I believe this means that log4j-core requires API version 2.1.0. log4j-api
2.1 works with providers that require 2.0.0 or 2.1.0.
On 8 October 2014 12:22, Ralph Goers wrote:
> I am not sure this change is correct. If a logging implementation is
> provided that is at version 2.0 is it going to wo
Java Logging and Lava Jogging. Love it!
On 8 October 2014 13:31, Andreas Opitz wrote:
> Nice, thank you for the info. Will read the article within the next days.
>
> Andreas
>
> 2014-10-08 14:49 GMT+02:00 Gary Gregory :
>
>> Cool! Now, only if I had taken German in school instead of Spanish...
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-865?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14164061#comment-14164061
]
Ralph Goers commented on LOG4J2-865:
See http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/cu
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-865?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14164047#comment-14164047
]
Matt Sicker commented on LOG4J2-865:
Well, the obvious way through the API is via
Log
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-865?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14164034#comment-14164034
]
Andrew Herr commented on LOG4J2-865:
Well, I thought it sounded straightforward, but a
Nice, thank you for the info. Will read the article within the next days.
Andreas
2014-10-08 14:49 GMT+02:00 Gary Gregory :
> Cool! Now, only if I had taken German in school instead of Spanish...
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Christian Grobmeier
> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> the
I am not sure this change is correct. If a logging implementation is provided
that is at version 2.0 is it going to work with the 2.1 API? If not then 2.1
should be the only compatible version (and skip 2.0 implementations).
Ralph
Begin forwarded message:
> From: [email protected]
> Subj
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-870?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Remko Popma closed LOG4J2-870.
--
Resolution: Not a Problem
Thanks for providing your configuration. Now I understand what happened.
Your
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-870?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14163448#comment-14163448
]
Remko Popma edited comment on LOG4J2-870 at 10/8/14 1:48 PM:
-
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-870?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Remko Popma reopened LOG4J2-870:
> log4j2 with servlet 3.0 container in WAS8.5 not working
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-870?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14163448#comment-14163448
]
Sudhakar commented on LOG4J2-870:
-
Sure. Please see below xml that did not work or it coul
Cool! Now, only if I had taken German in school instead of Spanish...
Gary
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> the current JavaMagazin issue features Logging, and of course I had
> to add an article on the log4j 2 highlights. Also I wrote a small one
> on
Nice!
I liked the Welches Jahre joke.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 2014/10/08, at 21:30, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> the current JavaMagazin issue features Logging, and of course I had
> to add an article on the log4j 2 highlights. Also I wrote a small one
> on using Apache Flum
Hi folks,
the current JavaMagazin issue features Logging, and of course I had
to add an article on the log4j 2 highlights. Also I wrote a small one
on using Apache Flume.
https://jaxenter.de/Java-Magazin/Java-Magazin-1114-176447
Cheers,
Christian
--
Christian Grobmeier
[email protected]
24 matches
Mail list logo
