logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: Merge log4j-async into log4j-core
Date Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:45:55 GMT
I'm not sure what you mean, but the guideline I use as to whether something belongs in core
is what dependencies it requires. The functionality it provides is secondary to me.  My preference
is for the Log4j API & core to have as few dependencies as possible.  


On Apr 12, 2013, at 9:38 AM, Scott Deboy wrote:

> I'd like to avoid what we had with log4j 1.x - the receivers/companions mess.  Whether
or something belongs in core or not is a fuzzy judgment call sometimes.  If possible, I would
like to see as much as possible included in a single 'release' (that includes 'receivers/companions'
if they ever are rewritten for log4j2).
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> It probably should be done anyway, but the various components would also need to check
for the presence of the disruptor and log a warning if it isn't there (I believe we do this
for Jansi and Jackson) as the disruptor would have to be an optional dependency.  In the async
package it can be non-optional so this is less important for anyone using Maven.
> Ralph
> On Apr 12, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> Because it has a dependency on the Disruptor, which Remko has said may not work on
all JDKs
>> Sent from my iPad
>> On Apr 12, 2013, at 8:23 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Why not more log4j-async into the core?
>>> Gary
>>> -- 
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org 
>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>>> Spring Batch in Action
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com 
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

View raw message