XML configuration requires the java.xml module which is a dependency to consider now.
I like the finer grained names. On 28 January 2018 at 22:17, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> 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? > > Gary > > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:38 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Ralph Goers <[email protected] > > > > 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 <[email protected]> > >> 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 <[email protected]> > >> 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 > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
