rgoers edited a comment on pull request #770: URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/770#issuecomment-1073168934
@dfa1 I do understand your dilemma. You already have existing code that has implemented this in the only way possible using SLF4J, which is a hack, However, I have a real problem implementing something that encourages doing things the wrong way. I don't want to see you have to maintain your private workaround. I'd rather see you spend time improving what Log4j does to make doing it the right way even easier. This change doesn't do that. The question I would ask is if in the long run you would be better off maintaining your own fork of the slf4j-log4j bridge or in spending the effort to do it the right way. Oh, and FYI I have to now create log4j-slf4j20-impl to support changes introduced there. FWIW, I did a search of Jira and only one other issue (LOG4J2-585) mentions detached Markers and that was to agree they should not be implemented in Log4j 2. To be honest, a surprisingly low number of users use Markers despite the utility they provide. But you are the first to have ever requested support for SLF4J's detached markers. I guess I am at the point with this PR that I personally don't want to merge it. But if another committer disagrees I won't veto it if they do. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
