You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to log4j-dev@logging.apache.org by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> on 2015/12/02 03:17:37 UTC

Re: SocketAppender.createAppender() and Protocol Enum

I think 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 <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sure, that's easy.
>
> Gary
> On Nov 2, 2015 6:39 PM, "Remko Popma" <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Okay. Can you leave the existing method in place and add a new one with
>> the desired signature?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 2015/11/03, at 9:57, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> What would 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 course!
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, November 2, 2015, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All:
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: SocketAppender.createAppender() and Protocol Enum

Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.

Mark the old one deprecated and remove the factory annotation?

On 1 December 2015 at 22:14, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I appreciated you want to keep core clean, but if it's easy to avoid
> breaking BC we should. We're talking about adding a factory method and
> calling one factory method from the other. Isn't that 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 Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think 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 <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sure, that's easy.
>>
>> Gary
>> On Nov 2, 2015 6:39 PM, "Remko Popma" <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Okay. Can you leave the existing method in place and add a new one with
>>> the desired signature?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On 2015/11/03, at 9:57, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What would 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 course!
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 2, 2015, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>

Re: SocketAppender.createAppender() and Protocol Enum

Posted by Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>.

Very quick! Thanks!
Remko

Sent from my iPhone

> On 2015/12/02, at 14:36, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Done.
> 
> Gary
> 
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:31 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Will do...
>> 
>> Gary
>> 
>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I appreciated you want to keep core clean, but if it's easy to avoid breaking BC we should. We're talking about adding a factory method and calling one factory method from the other. Isn't that 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 Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I think 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 <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Sure, that's easy.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Gary
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Nov 2, 2015 6:39 PM, "Remko Popma" <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Okay. Can you leave the existing method in place and add a new one with the desired signature?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2015/11/03, at 9:57, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> What would 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 course!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 2, 2015, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 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. 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org 
>>>>>>>>> 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/GaryGregory
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org 
>>>>>>> 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/GaryGregory
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org 
>>>> 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/GaryGregory
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org 
>> 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/GaryGregory
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org 
> 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/GaryGregory

Re: SocketAppender.createAppender() and Protocol Enum

Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.

Done.

Gary

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:31 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Will do...
>
> Gary
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I appreciated you want to keep core clean, but if it's easy to avoid
>> breaking BC we should. We're talking about adding a factory method and
>> calling one factory method from the other. Isn't that 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 Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think 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 <ga...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sure, that's easy.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>> On Nov 2, 2015 6:39 PM, "Remko Popma" <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Okay. Can you leave the existing method in place and add a new one with
>>>> the desired signature?
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On 2015/11/03, at 9:57, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What would 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 course!
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, November 2, 2015, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>



-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: SocketAppender.createAppender() and Protocol Enum

Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.

Will do...

Gary

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I appreciated you want to keep core clean, but if it's easy to avoid
> breaking BC we should. We're talking about adding a factory method and
> calling one factory method from the other. Isn't that 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 Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think 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 <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sure, that's easy.
>>
>> Gary
>> On Nov 2, 2015 6:39 PM, "Remko Popma" <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Okay. Can you leave the existing method in place and add a new one with
>>> the desired signature?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On 2015/11/03, at 9:57, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What would 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 course!
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 2, 2015, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: SocketAppender.createAppender() and Protocol Enum

Posted by Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>.

I appreciated you want to keep core clean, but if it's easy to avoid breaking BC we should. We're talking about adding a factory method and calling one factory method from the other. Isn't that 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 Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think 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 <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sure, that's easy.
>> 
>> Gary
>> 
>>> On Nov 2, 2015 6:39 PM, "Remko Popma" <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Okay. Can you leave the existing method in place and add a new one with the desired signature?
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On 2015/11/03, at 9:57, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> What would 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 course!
>>>> 
>>>> Gary
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Monday, November 2, 2015, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org 
>>>>>> 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/GaryGregory
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org 
>>>> 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/GaryGregory
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org 
> 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/GaryGregory

Re: SocketAppender.createAppender() and Protocol Enum

Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:

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

Done.

Gary


>
> Gary
>
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sure, that's easy.
>>
>> Gary
>> On Nov 2, 2015 6:39 PM, "Remko Popma" <re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Okay. Can you leave the existing method in place and add a new one with
>>> the desired signature?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On 2015/11/03, at 9:57, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What would 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 course!
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 2, 2015, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>



-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory