If you are going to validate JSON you would do it with a JSON schema, not an
XML schema. From what I understand almost nobody does it. So the answer to your
question is that it doesn’t need an answer because it isn’t required.
Ralph
> On Apr 12, 2016, at 11:31 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> I
I still do not see how this can be changed AND still have the ability to
generically validate log events as I asked in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-623?focusedCommentId=13995487&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13995487
Gary
On Mon, Apr
Gary,
I am not sure how this got implemented this way despite me objecting and saying
it was wrong. Please fix it.
Ralph
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> You'll see if a toggle or a new appender makes sense depending on how much
> code disruption this causes.
>
> Keep
lol, well see, now I know you read it. Sorry, I'm just kinda like that...
But seriously I can probably whip up a patch for a toggle, that sounds like
a reasonable approach.
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Gary Gregory
wrote:
> "They are also Java nazi's" [sic]?
>
> Really? Is that necessary?
You'll see if a toggle or a new appender makes sense depending on how much
code disruption this causes.
Keep in mind that the Jackson-based appenders work for JSON, XML, and YAML
formats.
Make sure you base on work on the latest from Git master.
Good luck!
Gary
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:26 PM,
"They are also Java nazi's" [sic]?
Really? Is that necessary?
How about providing a patch for either an alternate JSON layout or a toggle
on the current layout?
That would sure be more productive that name calling.
Gary
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 1:53 PM, John Bush wrote:
> If you are frustrate
If you are frustrated by how the ootb JsonLayout handles context data, see
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-623
I've published how I worked around it here:
https://github.com/johntbush/log4j2-jsonlayout
