Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Hello Chia-Ping I have just included the configuration migration section in the KIP-653 . Please take a look. Best, TengYao Jörn Franke 於 2024年11月19日 週二 上午12:36寫道： > Yaml allows to add comments compared to JSON which is not only for > examples good

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Yaml allows to add comments compared to JSON which is not only for examples good, but also to document certain implications when deploying production configuration. > Am 18.11.2024 um 15:02 schrieb TengYao Chi : > > Hi everyone, > > From my experience, it has been quite challenging to underst

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

hi Mickael, Thanks for the clarification. I'm still +1 on using YAML, as this PR ultimately changes the 'content' of the log4j properties file. So why not use a more readable structure with this change? Additionally, users can still use the deprecated properties when migrating to 4.0. hi TengYao

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Hi everyone, >From my experience, it has been quite challenging to understand and transform the .properties file from log4j 1 to log4j 2, as the properties format is fairly flat and difficult to understand. In comparison, YAML is more structured, easier to read, and widely used. I would like to +1

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Hi Chia-Ping, Yes in 4.0.0 we will only provide log4j2 configuration files. We will still support log4j.properties files for compatibility but that will print a warning when these are used. However my question is about the format of our log4j2 files. Currently in the PR we are using the "properti

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

hi, Mickael I'm +1 for using the log4j2 format. Otherwise, it's odd for users to see deprecation warnings about log4j.properties when using our example files. Best, Chia-Ping Mickael Maison 於 2024年11月18日 週一 下午7:33寫道： > Hi, > > The log4j2 migration PR is pretty much ready to be merged and the

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Hi, The log4j2 migration PR is pretty much ready to be merged and the first deadlines for 4.0.0 is approaching fast. I think we should decide which format to use in our example log4j2 files to avoid having to update the format shortly after 4.0.0. This point is not really covered by KIP-653: Upgr

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Hi, I think our example log4j2 file should be as idiomatic as possible. If YAML is now the recommended format, then it makes sense to adopt it. I would also do this directly in 4.0.0. Like David, one concern when adding extra dependencies is CVEs. YAML is a widely used format and the libraries ar

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Hi Viktor, On 31.10.2024 10:19, Viktor Somogyi-Vass wrote: I could see a transition for Kafka configs too to YAML. It's widely used in other projects as well and for Kafka too it would make sense to group them for instance by log, storage, networking, security etc.. It definitely has an advantag

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Hi all, I think it's a great idea to use a different configuration method as default. Personally I'd prefer YAML as well because it's the most concise and easy to read format. 1. This would establish two different config formats in Kafka. Properties for kafka configs and YAML/XML/JSON for log con

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Hi David, On 29.10.2024 16:30, David Arthur wrote: 2. How do we determine which type of config file has been given? Do we try to infer it based on file extension? What is the behavior if both old and new files exist? I believe that the current PR[1] shows the correct behavior. Upgraded system

Re: Configuration format for Log4j Core 2.x

Thanks for starting this discussion, Piotr! I think moving towards a more modern format for our logging config would be great. Personally, I think YAML would be the nicest to work with as an operator. It should also be very familiar to those who work in Docker and Kubernetes. A few thoughts 1. T