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 D490B173F0 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 04:14:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 22681 invoked by uid 500); 2 Dec 2015 04:14:37 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4j-dev-archive@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 22574 invoked by uid 500); 2 Dec 2015 04:14:37 -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 22564 invoked by uid 99); 2 Dec 2015 04:14:37 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 04:14:37 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1B136C6E17 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 04:14:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3.901 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.901 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=3, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-us-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0fYJnc4K-J81 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 04:14:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com (mail-pa0-f47.google.com [209.85.220.47]) by mx1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 895DD2143D for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 04:14:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pacdm15 with SMTP id dm15so27242274pac.3 for ; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 20:14:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:to; bh=eOEbFr4uO2spD7lqV5HKV+LCCv8C4DJUAWxrsqANZYc=; b=dFQT2t1Iy0OQefVxkc+Fn0mwBLMeYwcI642tfHQ2kgz7KW7TMFpbEokC/S82bS1ged kH4D4JpgcEW4FmZNYyrCHDEakRX3bNXAZDPs/oaQ6icPSvARarITijcOc3uTF/5dwE3A oufEUT0n7OHqrJ2m9DAWbqxKjritf9nF+SPyD1kSR3sCr3Y36yZm2BjAZWb0y6N6qPTb hebNy+Oj1U2GHyMspihXRYJ4hpgNSq5r9TQCd8JsuVJCe7EXmjW78z/dpNFljgFGcKnO e92sAOnIoRFAyVxyTih3o/sK2vGtE8xRIav+DQAQKhIzWtfjtEdUwr+S0dumQGEIOL5c VzJg== X-Received: by 10.67.6.1 with SMTP id cq1mr1586769pad.78.1449029659547; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 20:14:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.99.203.182] (pw126152207046.10.panda-world.ne.jp. [126.152.207.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g79sm917182pfj.13.2015.12.01.20.14.18 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Dec 2015 20:14:18 -0800 (PST) From: Remko Popma Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-88BAE852-DEB1-470D-8AEB-7DBE358E1633 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: SocketAppender.createAppender() and Protocol Enum Message-Id: Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 13:14:13 +0900 References: <52A25494-7C3D-429E-A04B-D36DF6667B4D@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: To: Log4J Developers List X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13B143) --Apple-Mail-88BAE852-DEB1-470D-8AEB-7DBE358E1633 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I appreciated you want to keep core clean, but if it's easy to avoid breakin= g BC we should. We're talking about adding a factory method and calling one f= actory method from the other. Isn't that very little effort? Seems worth the= effort to be kind to our users.=20 Sent from my iPhone > On 2015/12/02, at 11:17, Gary Gregory wrote: >=20 > I think I'll not duplicate the create() API, that seems silly. I do not be= lieve we should provide BC at the level in the Core. >=20 > Gary >=20 >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Gary Gregory wro= te: >> Sure, that's easy. >>=20 >> Gary >>=20 >>> On Nov 2, 2015 6:39 PM, "Remko Popma" wrote: >>> Okay. Can you leave the existing method in place and add a new one with t= he desired signature? >>>=20 >>> Sent from my iPhone >>>=20 >>>> On 2015/11/03, at 9:57, Gary Gregory wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Remko Popma wr= ote: >>>>> What would be the advantage of doing this? What problem are you trying= to solve by replacing the string arg with an enumeration arg? >>>>=20 >>>> Is that a trick question? ;-) Type safety from my call site, of course!= >>>>=20 >>>> Gary >>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Monday, November 2, 2015, Gary Gregory wr= ote: >>>>>> Hi All: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Right now, SocketAppender.createAppender() takes protocol String. Can= we change that to a Protocol Enum safely, without breaking existing configs= ? That would break BC unless we add another method.=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Gary >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> --=20 >>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org=20 >>>>>> 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 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> --=20 >>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org=20 >>>> 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 >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org=20 > 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-88BAE852-DEB1-470D-8AEB-7DBE358E1633 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I appreciated you want to keep core cl= ean, but if it's easy to avoid breaking BC we should. We're talking about ad= ding a factory method and calling one factory method from the other. Isn't t= hat very little effort? Seems worth the effort to be kind to our users. = ;

Sent from my iPhone

On 2015/12/02, at 11:17, Gary Gre= gory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:

I t= hink I'll not duplicate the create() API, that seems silly. I do not believe= we should provide BC at the level in the Core.

Gary

On Mon, Nov= 2, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:

Sure, that's easy.<= /p>

Gary

On Nov 2, 2015 6:39 PM, "Remko Popma" <remko.popma@gmail.com> wrote:
Okay. Can you leave the existing method in place and add a new o= ne with the desired signature?

Sent from my iPhone
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Remko Popma <remko.p= opma@gmail.com> wrote:
What w= ould be the advantage of doing this? What problem are you trying to solve by= replacing the string arg with an enumeration arg?

Is that a trick question? ;-) Type safety from my call site, of cours= e!

Gary



On Monday, November 2, 2015, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.co= m> wrote:
Hi All:
Right now, SocketAppender.createAppender() takes proto= col String. Can we change that to a Protocol Enum safely, without b= reaking existing configs? That would break BC unless we add another method.&= nbsp;

Thoughts?




--
<= div>



--
<= div class=3D"gmail_signature">
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
<= a href=3D"http://www.manning.com/bauer3/" target=3D"_blank">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/GaryGrego= ry
= --Apple-Mail-88BAE852-DEB1-470D-8AEB-7DBE358E1633--