Hi, When someone calls any of the init methods like org.apache.logging.log4j.core.config.Configurator.initialize(String, ClassLoader, String), you get a Core LoggerContext, and that's what you've got to work with... Why is that a bad idea? That's the API we provide.
Gary On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > So you are saying that your application is getting Loggers by doing > LoggerContext.getLogger()? I guess I don’t really understand why that is a > good idea. Are you saying you have your own custom LoggerContext and that > you want to modify Log4j’s LoggerContext simply so you can modify yours? > > Ralph > > > On Aug 21, 2017, at 3:01 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > My use case is that deep in the guts and call stack of my server/app, I > > have a specific Core LoggerContext that I should/must use. Log4j and > other > > components must co-exist in a long-lived server that have modules that > are > > constantly re-initialized/re-configured during development and testing > > phases. During acceptance and production, the are fewer reconfigurations, > > but they do happen. The bottom line is that most logging code dishes out > > Loggers out of specific LoggerContext instances and not out of the > > LogManager classes (only in a few rare places.) > > > > Gary > > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > > > > wrote: > > > >> Did you ask this question last week? Why is it needed? Why can’t this > be > >> handled in LogManager? > >> > >> Ralph > >> > >>> On Aug 21, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi All: > >>> > >>> I have a need for the shortcut method > >>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.LoggerContext getLogger(Class) which > would > >>> use getCannonicalName(). > >>> > >>> Any objection to adding that? > >>> > >>> Gary > >> > >> > >> > > >
