Closed ppkarwasz closed 6 months ago
I support the proposed log4j-1.2-api
changes.
Log4j Core contains ... an old copy of remkop/picocli. This should also be ... transferred to a new artifact
Why do we create a log4j-picocli
instead of using info.picocli:picocli
?
@vy,
I meant to transfer the code that used Picocli to a new artifact and add info.picocli:picocli
as a dependency.
Actually I have a branch for this issue, which is almost ready to be published.
I just don't know which repo should be used: a custom logger generator doesn't match the purpose of logging-log4j-transform
, on the other hand logging-log4j-tools
is for internal tools only.
@ppkarwasz, if we are gonna totally remove it in 3.x
, I think we can lay down the separate artifact to 2.x
to rest in peace.
Closed in #2435
There are a couple of CLI commands in the current 2.x artifacts. Their code is not used by other Log4j components.
log4j-1.2-api
log4j-1.2-api
contains a Log4j1ConfigurationConverter, which shares code with the old (and disabled)Log4j1ConfigurationFactory
. IMHO:logging-log4j-transform
).Remark that the new configuration factory used by
log4j-1.2-api
is based onorg.apache.log4j.builders
and is extensible. With some minor adjustments to theo.a.l.b.Builder
interface we can switchLog4j1ConfigurationConverter
to the new infrastructure and use it in openrewrite/rewrite-logging-frameworks#48.log4j-core
Log4j Core contains a simple custom logger generator and an old copy of remkop/picocli. This should also be removed from the main code and transfered to a new artifact.