On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 9:17 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Beyond these moves, the next slice and dice would be to deal with our XML, > JSON, and YAML dependencies: > > We have no dependencies to read an XML configuration. > > For JSON and YAML configs, we use Jackson. > > For XML, JSON, and YAML layouts we use Jackson. > > We could spit things out like this: > > log4j-json: JSON configuration and layout using Jackson > log4j-xml: XML layout using Jackson (XML configuration remains in > log4j-core) > log4j-yaml: YAML configuration and layout using Jackson > > Or finner: > > log4j-config-json: JSON configuration using Jackson > log4j-layout-json: JSON layout using Jackson > log4j-config-yaml: YAML configuration using Jackson > log4j-layout-json: JSON layout using Jackson > > The thinking being, why should I drag in JSON configuration code if all I > want is a JSON layout. > > Thoughts? > And now that we know that XML is not in java.base, we would also have: log4j-config-xml: XML configuration using our current custom code and not Jackson. log4j-layout-xml: XML layout using Jackson ? Gary > > Gary > > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:38 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I should add that each module must have a unique package hierarchy so, >>> in general, the package names should be org.apache.logging.log4j.modulename. >>> In this case it would be org.apache.logging.log4j.jeromq.apppender. >>> The mom package probably has no value. >>> >> >> I'll change the packages and write the changes in the release notes. >> >> Gary >> >> >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 2:23 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Any component that is not in the core module MUST NOT use the core >>> package. That would make it impossible to package them as Java 9 modules. >>> > >>> > Ralph >>> > >>> >> On Jan 28, 2018, at 11:31 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hi All, >>> >> >>> >> Now that the ZeroMQ via JeroMQ support is in its own module >>> log4j-jeromq, I >>> >> wonder if the Java package should change from >>> >> >>> >> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.mom.jeromq >>> >> >>> >> to >>> >> >>> >> org.apache.logging.log4j.appender.mom.jeromq >>> >> >>> >> ? >>> >> >>> >> Same for the recently moved JPA appender. >>> >> >>> >> Same for impending move of the Kafka appender. >>> >> >>> >> This would break BC for Core for apps that directly reference these >>> >> classes. As opposed to referencing the appenders from an XML/JSON/YAML >>> >> config file. >>> >> >>> >> Gary >>> > >>> >>> >>> >> >
