camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luca Burgazzoli <lburgazz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Log4j 2
Date Tue, 09 Aug 2016 12:59:14 GMT
I do not remember now but some problems come from the test
dependencies we use (like microcluster, etc)
Need to digg into the issue more once the majority of the migration will be done

---
Luca Burgazzoli


On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ibsen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Ah sounds good the migration goes so well, and that there is only a
> few components that may be stuck on log4j 1.x. But those 3rd party
> libraries may migrate to log4j v2 or some other logging api (slf4j-api
> etc) in the future.
>
> Though a bit surprising that Apache Spark is locked down on log4j v1.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Luca Burgazzoli <lburgazzoli@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've setup my own branch
>> (https://github.com/lburgazzoli/apache-camel/tree/CAMEL-10224-log4j2)
>> were I'm doing some test to migrate to log4j2.
>> So far migrating the properties was not an issue and automated through a script.
>>
>> The following component can't be migrate as they have some code based on log4j:
>> - camel-spark
>> - camel-spark-rest
>> - camel-sip
>> - camel-hbase
>>
>> For other components I found that log4j.properties was used also to
>> perform some test (i.e. a file to serve in jetty9).
>>
>> All the remaining component and caml-core have been tested an
>> successfully migrated.
>> I still need to migrate examples, tooling and so on.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Luca Burgazzoli
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> We have a ticket to track migration issues:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1473
>>>
>>> On 2 August 2016 at 12:24, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Now, that's a motivation I can get behind! :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 12:38 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Another motivation is that when Camel wants to work on JDK9 support,
>>>> you'll
>>>> > find that log4j 1.x doesn't work anymore.
>>>> >
>>>> > On 2 August 2016 at 11:21, Luca Burgazzoli <lburgazzoli@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > My only motivation was to keep the dependencies up to date
>>>> > >
>>>> > > ---
>>>> > > Luca Burgazzoli
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 5:50 PM, James Carman <
>>>> james@carmanconsulting.com
>>>> > >
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > > > If it's only for test, what's the motivation?  Is anything
broken?
>>>> > Does
>>>> > > > anything code directly to the API?
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 11:21 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >> You can use YAML instead of XML or properties files for
a nice
>>>> config
>>>> > > >> format. Plus, there's a few log4j 1->2 tools out there
already:
>>>> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1436
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >> On 2 August 2016 at 09:48, Nicola Ferraro <ni.ferraro@gmail.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >> > I logged a Jira:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-10217
>>>> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Claus Ibsen <
>>>> claus.ibsen@gmail.com>
>>>> > > >> wrote:
>>>> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > Hi
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> > > Yeah some should be removed, but mind that some
3rd party
>>>> > libraries
>>>> > > >> > > are using log4j hardcoded as dependency so not
all can be
>>>> removed.
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> > > But I think camel-scr is a mistake to use log4j.
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> > > Its worthwhile I think to take a look which
one can be removed
>>>> or
>>>> > > not.
>>>> > > >> > > Feel free to log a JIRA and work on this.
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Nicola Ferraro
<
>>>> > nferraro@redhat.com
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > wrote:
>>>> > > >> > > > Doing integration tests I found that some
components include
>>>> > > logging
>>>> > > >> > > > implementations outside the test scope,
so I did a fast check:
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > > *for comp in $(ls | grep "camel-" | grep
-v ".iml"); do*
>>>> > > >> > > > * cd $comp*
>>>> > > >> > > > * mvn dependency:tree | grep
>>>> > > >> > > > 'log4j\|logback\|slf4j-simple\|slf4j-jdk14\|slf4j-log4j12'
|
>>>> > grep
>>>> > > -v
>>>> > > >> > > test |
>>>> > > >> > > > xargs -I line echo "$(pwd) line"*
>>>> > > >> > > > * cd ..*
>>>> > > >> > > > *done*
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > > Although it is ok for a spring-boot starter
to include a
>>>> logging
>>>> > > >> > > > implementation, they should not be included
in normal
>>>> component
>>>> > > >> modules
>>>> > > >> > > IMO.
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > > Should these dependencies be removed?
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > > The results:
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-atmos [INFO]
|  +-
>>>> > > >> > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-gora [INFO] |
 +-
>>>> > > >> > > > org.slf4j:slf4j-log4j12:jar:1.7.21:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-gora [INFO] |
 -
>>>> > > >> > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-hbase [INFO]
|  +-
>>>> > > >> > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-jbpm [INFO] +-
>>>> > > >> > > > org.slf4j:slf4j-log4j12:jar:1.7.21:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-jbpm [INFO] |
 -
>>>> > > >> > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-jt400 [INFO]
+-
>>>> > > >> > > > org.slf4j:slf4j-log4j12:jar:1.7.21:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-jt400 [INFO]
|  -
>>>> > > >> > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-krati [INFO]
|  -
>>>> > > >> > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-openshift [INFO]
|  -
>>>> > > >> > > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-salesforce [INFO]
+-
>>>> > > >> > > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-scr [INFO] +-
>>>> > > >> > > > org.slf4j:slf4j-log4j12:jar:1.7.21:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-scr [INFO] +-
>>>> > > >> log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-spark [INFO]
|  +-
>>>> > > >> > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-spark [INFO]
|  |  +-
>>>> > > >> > > > log4j:apache-log4j-extras:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-spark-rest [INFO]
|  +-
>>>> > > >> > > > org.slf4j:slf4j-simple:jar:1.7.21:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-spring-boot [INFO]
|  |  +-
>>>> > > >> > > > ch.qos.logback:logback-classic:jar:1.1.7:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-spring-boot [INFO]
|  |  |  -
>>>> > > >> > > > ch.qos.logback:logback-core:jar:1.1.7:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-spring-boot [INFO]
|  |  -
>>>> > > >> > > > org.slf4j:log4j-over-slf4j:jar:1.7.21:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-spring-boot-starter
[INFO] |  |  +-
>>>> > > >> > > > ch.qos.logback:logback-classic:jar:1.1.7:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-spring-boot-starter
[INFO] |  |  |
>>>> -
>>>> > > >> > > > ch.qos.logback:logback-core:jar:1.1.7:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-spring-boot-starter
[INFO] |  |  -
>>>> > > >> > > > org.slf4j:log4j-over-slf4j:jar:1.7.21:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-zipkin-starter
[INFO] |  |  +-
>>>> > > >> > > > ch.qos.logback:logback-classic:jar:1.1.7:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-zipkin-starter
[INFO] |  |  |  -
>>>> > > >> > > > ch.qos.logback:logback-core:jar:1.1.7:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-zipkin-starter
[INFO] |  |  -
>>>> > > >> > > > org.slf4j:log4j-over-slf4j:jar:1.7.21:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > > *./camel/components/camel-zookeeper [INFO]
|  +-
>>>> > > >> > > > log4j:log4j:jar:1.2.17:compile*
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Luca Burgazzoli
<
>>>> > > >> lburgazzoli@gmail.com
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> > > > wrote:
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > >> Yep, I meant upgrading log4j for test
only, run-time should
>>>> > > >> > > >> definitively use slf4j-api (or maybe
a custom facade)
>>>> > > >> > > >>
>>>> > > >> > > >> ---
>>>> > > >> > > >> Luca Burgazzoli
>>>> > > >> > > >>
>>>> > > >> > > >>
>>>> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Claus
Ibsen <
>>>> > > claus.ibsen@gmail.com>
>>>> > > >> > > wrote:
>>>> > > >> > > >> > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 2:42 PM,
Luca Burgazzoli <
>>>> > > >> > > lburgazzoli@gmail.com>
>>>> > > >> > > >> wrote:
>>>> > > >> > > >> >> Hello,
>>>> > > >> > > >> >>
>>>> > > >> > > >> >> as log4j 1.2 is EOL since
a year, would it make sense to
>>>> > move
>>>> > > to
>>>> > > >> > > log4j
>>>> > > >> > > >> 2 ?
>>>> > > >> > > >> >>
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> > We only use it for testing. No
runtime dependency.
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> > log4j v2 did not support log4j.properties
file so any
>>>> > migration
>>>> > > >> was
>>>> > > >> > a
>>>> > > >> > > >> > real pain as the log4j xml file
format is verbose and
>>>> clunky
>>>> > to
>>>> > > >> work
>>>> > > >> > > >> > with.
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> > Only recently they added support
for .properties file but I
>>>> > > think
>>>> > > >> > they
>>>> > > >> > > >> > may have changed the syntax slightly
(not sure).
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >>
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> >
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22485074/log4j-2-doesnt-support-log4j-properties-file-anymore
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> > And I think I read somewhere that
log4j v1 has problems
>>>> with
>>>> > > Java
>>>> > > >> 9.
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> > If migration can be super easy
on current 2.18 then it is
>>>> > okay.
>>>> > > >> > > >> > Some kind of migration tool that
can covert v1 properties
>>>> to
>>>> > v2
>>>> > > >> > > >> > properties then that can be doable.
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> > But if not then I would like to
postpone this to Camel 3.
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> >>
>>>> > > >> > > >> >> ---
>>>> > > >> > > >> >> Luca Burgazzoli
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> >
>>>> > > >> > > >> > --
>>>> > > >> > > >> > Claus Ibsen
>>>> > > >> > > >> > -----------------
>>>> > > >> > > >> > http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus
>>>> > > >> > > >> > Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2
>>>> > > >> > > >>
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>> > > >> > > > --
>>>> > > >> > > > Nicola Ferraro <nferraro@redhat.com>
>>>> > > >> > > > Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Fuse
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> > > --
>>>> > > >> > > Claus Ibsen
>>>> > > >> > > -----------------
>>>> > > >> > > http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus
>>>> > > >> > > Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2
>>>> > > >> > >
>>>> > > >> >
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >> --
>>>> > > >> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> --
> Claus Ibsen
> -----------------
> http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus
> Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2

Mime
View raw message