Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-logging-log4j-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4j-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9DFA6109FC for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:43:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 68944 invoked by uid 500); 29 Aug 2015 20:43:32 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4j-dev-archive@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 68885 invoked by uid 500); 29 Aug 2015 20:43:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Log4J Developers List" Reply-To: "Log4J Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list log4j-dev@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 68875 invoked by uid 99); 29 Aug 2015 20:43:32 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:43:32 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 06B241AB1A7 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:43:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3.001 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.001 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=3, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-eu-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ueW5nnQ8yXCK for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:43:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp679.redcondor.net (smtp679.redcondor.net [208.80.206.79]) by mx1-eu-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-eu-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id EBECE24B15 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:43:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailproxy10.neonova.net ([137.118.22.75]) by smtp679.redcondor.net ({61e46e34-cfba-43f0-8a4f-f3a481f7eb08}) via TCP (outbound) with ESMTP id 20150829204304548_0679 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:43:04 +0000 X-RC-FROM: X-RC-RCPT: Received: from [192.168.1.6] (ip72-201-43-179.ph.ph.cox.net [72.201.43.179]) (Authenticated sender: ralph.goers@dslextreme.com) by mailproxy10.neonova.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4763D360060 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 16:43:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Ralph Goers Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F5B26676-E0CB-4CEA-879E-1C50D51342D0" Message-Id: <615A28D3-3FB1-40E0-A90F-FDFCB9CB18F6@dslextreme.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2102\)) Subject: Re: Name org.apache.logging.log4j.junit.InitialLoggerContext class Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 13:42:59 -0700 References: To: Log4J Developers List In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2102) X-DLP-ENABLED: 137.118.22.64/27 X-MAG-OUTBOUND: greymail.redcondor.net@137.118.22.64/27 --Apple-Mail=_F5B26676-E0CB-4CEA-879E-1C50D51342D0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I too have found that name a bit confusing. It actually kind of makes me = think it is somehow a subclass of InitialContext. Either one of your proposed names is fine with me. I guess I prefer = LoggerContextRule simply because it is slightly shorter and we don=E2=80=99= t support any other =E2=80=9CRule=E2=80=9D types that I am aware of. Ralph > On Aug 29, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Gary Gregory = wrote: >=20 > Hi All, >=20 > I was going to write a couple of blog posts this weekend about log4j = and I was going to start by talking about how useful our = InitialLoggerContext test class is to isolate logging configs for = specific tests, but I find the class name misleading. The class is a = JUnit Rule so it should be postfixed with "Rule" IMO and the "Initial" = prefix is just weird, initial as opposed to what? We have no other = LoggerContext JUnit rules. I would not mind renaming this class to = LoggerContextRule. That name is clear and there can be no mistake that = this is not a special kind of LoggerContext. I could even go for = LoggerContextJUnitRule to make it clear that it is for use with JUnit = and not in any other kind of code. >=20 > Thoughts? >=20 > Gary >=20 > --=20 > 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 = =20 > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory --Apple-Mail=_F5B26676-E0CB-4CEA-879E-1C50D51342D0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
I too have found that name a bit confusing. = It actually kind of makes me think it is somehow a subclass of = InitialContext.

Either one of your proposed names is fine with me.  I = guess I prefer LoggerContextRule simply because it is slightly shorter = and we don=E2=80=99t support any other =E2=80=9CRule=E2=80=9D types that = I am aware of.

Ralph

On Aug 29, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Gary Gregory = <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi All,

I was going to write a couple of blog = posts this weekend about log4j and I was going to start by talking about = how useful our InitialLoggerContext test class is to isolate logging = configs for specific tests, but I find the class name misleading. The = class is a JUnit Rule so it should be postfixed with "Rule" IMO and the = "Initial" prefix is just weird, initial as opposed to what? We have no = other LoggerContext JUnit rules. I would not mind renaming this class to = LoggerContextRule. That name is clear and there can be no mistake that = this is not a special kind of LoggerContext. I could even go for = LoggerContextJUnitRule to make it clear that it is for use with JUnit = and not in any other kind of code.
Thoughts?

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

= --Apple-Mail=_F5B26676-E0CB-4CEA-879E-1C50D51342D0--