timestamp and thread name in StatusLogger
Is there any particular reason we don't render the timestamp and thread name in StatusLogger?
Re: timestamp and thread name in StatusLogger
I've found that odd myself just like Maven output does not contain timestamps, might be for "simplest possible output". I'm all for adding these. Gary On Fri, Aug 26, 2022, 03:36 Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > Is there any particular reason we don't render the timestamp and thread > name in StatusLogger? >
Re: timestamp and thread name in StatusLogger
StatusLogger either uses SimpleLogger or StatusConsoleListener to print the log messages. If StatusConsoleListener is registered then it does print the date and thread name. When no listeners are registered SimpleLogger is used. If System Property log4j2.StatusLogger.DateFormat is defined then the date will be included. SimpleLogger doesn’t print the thread name. Ralph > On Aug 26, 2022, at 12:36 AM, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > > Is there any particular reason we don't render the timestamp and thread > name in StatusLogger?
SLF4J 1.8 and SLF4J 2.0
Ceki never released a GA version of SLF4J 1.8. Since we are adding support for SLF4J 2.0 in the next release I would suggest we also remove log4j-slf4j18-impl. Ralph
Re: timestamp and thread name in StatusLogger
It does need to be optional. If you are running your app as a service on Linux/Unix the logs will already contain a timestamp because they get routed to the system log. So having a timestamp in them makes them ugly for that case. Ralph > On Aug 26, 2022, at 5:39 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > I've found that odd myself just like Maven output does not contain > timestamps, might be for "simplest possible output". I'm all for adding > these. > > Gary > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022, 03:36 Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > >> Is there any particular reason we don't render the timestamp and thread >> name in StatusLogger? >>
Re: SLF4J 1.8 and SLF4J 2.0
Makes sense. Gary On Fri, Aug 26, 2022, 15:55 Ralph Goers wrote: > Ceki never released a GA version of SLF4J 1.8. Since we are adding > support for SLF4J 2.0 in the next release I would suggest we also remove > log4j-slf4j18-impl. > > Ralph
Re: SLF4J 1.8 and SLF4J 2.0
Agree, makes sense. > On Aug 27, 2022, at 7:50, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Makes sense. > > Gary > >> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022, 15:55 Ralph Goers wrote: >> >> Ceki never released a GA version of SLF4J 1.8. Since we are adding >> support for SLF4J 2.0 in the next release I would suggest we also remove >> log4j-slf4j18-impl. >> >> Ralph
