Thorbjoern Ravn Andersen wrote:
Ceki Gulcu skrev:
Hello all,
I would like to split/redesign the LoggingEvent object as follows: Hi.
Could you elaborate on what you want to achieve? Makes it easier to evaluate your suggestion.
One important goal is to better support interoperability between logback versions. For example, in a client/server situation, when a client is using a different version of logback than the server. Here the client is the application generating LoggingEvent instances and the server is the application receiving serialized LoggingEvent instances via the network. A second goal is to simplify the code in LoggingEvent. If LoggingEvent instances do not have to worry about serialization, then LoggingEvent can be simplified. LoggingEventMemento needs to worry about serialization, replacing LoggingEvent in client/server communication. Another goal of this RFC is to identify uses of LoggingEvent so that logback can cater for those use cases, possibly via new object types. It is not clear how LoggingEventMemento would actually ensure version compatibility, especially if LoggingEventMemento fields change in time. However, as LoggingEventMemento is only a data carrying tpye, it is likely to be much smaller in (code) size. -- Ceki Gülcü Logback: The reliable, generic, fast and flexible logging framework for Java. http://logback.qos.ch