Ok, this is starting to be simpler, as I'm sure you would all prefer. You can look at the branch LOG4J-609 again if you like. Here are the simplifications that I have made.
1) The listeners no longer report their level. They can decide if they want to do something with a status message in their log method. 2) There is no longer the option to configure the StatusLogger to write to a file. 3) I moved StatusConsoleListener out of log4j-api and into log4j-core, where we can probably get away with making more drastic changes to it in the future (so I can fix LOG4J-609) I have to check on the tests and stuff, but in general, I'm pretty happy with how small the impact is and in its ability to make a better solution for LOG4J-609 possible in the future. On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > This actually makes me wonder why you can configure the status logger from > a configuration file. Shouldn't this just be a system property or something? > > > On 13 July 2014 18:57, Bruce Brouwer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The listener can be removed, but nothing ever does. Right now it can >> never know if it should be removed. And also, all that level checking is >> cached in StatusLogger. If all you do is change the status level of the >> listener it has no effect on the cached value in StatusLogger. It may end >> up having no effect. >> >> This is some of the stuff I was trying to clean up with my fix that I >> have been delinquent with. >> >> I will try to simplify this on the branch and see if it makes sense in >> the next hour or two. >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > -- Bruce Brouwer about.me/bruce.brouwer [image: Bruce Brouwer on about.me] <http://about.me/bruce.brouwer>
