[GitHub] [logging-log4j2] carterkozak commented on pull request #735: Adds a shorthand method to specify components names

[GitBox <gi...@apache.org>]

carterkozak commented on pull request #735:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/735#issuecomment-1027030918


   It sounds like we're discussing improving several different parts of the properties configuration scheme at once -- It's great to have an idea of where we want to go before we get started, but I think it would also be helpful to decomp the pieces and approach them separately.
   
   1. Support logger configuration without a `.name = <NAME>` using `logger.<NAME>.<suffix> = <value>` e.g. `logger.org.apache.foo.level = INFO`
   2. Support setting logger level and appenderRef at the same time, perhaps with a new suffix e.g. `logger.myAppender.config = INFO, console`
   3. Similar improvements to other components (appenders/filters)
   
   I think **1** is the most complex, and we'll have to think a bit about interactions with components that can be nested within the logger config. Would we need to ban nested component references when this is used? I suppose it depends how the parser works. It is a substantial departure from all other node-based configurations, and may be difficult to support as features are added (since propertiesconfiguration may need to be aware of logger suffixes).
   
   **2** I don't have a strong opinion between `.level` and `.config` suffixes, the initial `level` suggestion might be easier for users to understand without spending a great deal of time reading the documentation. The `.config` shorthand suffix would be clearer though.
   
   I'd like to hear what other folks think.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org