I am against encouraging users to directly acquire a Logger. Ralph
> On Aug 21, 2017, at 5:24 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:01 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > wrote: > >> It is actually funny that you say that. The API we provide for performing >> logging is log4j-api, not log4j-core. We provide access in log4j-core for >> users to customize how they configure their logging - not perform it. >> > > I'm all about humoring the ML :-) > > Any further thoughts on adding these APIs? For or against? > > Gary > >> >> Ralph >> >>> On Aug 21, 2017, at 3:42 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >>
