[JIRA] (SLF4J-394) add renderThrowable() and renderLevel() protected methods + mark LOG_LEVEL_* protected in simple provider

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[JIRA] (SLF4J-394) add renderThrowable() and renderLevel() protected methods + mark LOG_LEVEL_* protected in simple provider

JIRA noreply-jira@qos.ch

    [ https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-394?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18370#comment-18370 ]

JIRA Administrator commented on SLF4J-394:
------------------------------------------

Hi Hervé,

Thank you for reporting the "close" issue. Apparently, in order to close a JIRA issue, the reporter in addition to the "close" issue privilege has to have the "transition" issue privilege. The problem has been solved now.

> add renderThrowable() and renderLevel() protected methods + mark LOG_LEVEL_* protected in simple provider
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SLF4J-394
>                 URL: https://jira.qos.ch/browse/SLF4J-394
>             Project: SLF4J
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: slf4j-simple
>    Affects Versions: 1.7.24
>         Environment: Apache Maven 3.5 with maven-slf4j-provider http://maven.apache.org/ref/3-LATEST/maven-slf4j-provider/
>            Reporter: Hervé Boutemy
>            Assignee: Ceki Gülcü
>             Fix For: 1.7.25
>
>
> Apache Maven created a Groovy monkey patch to extract such renderThrowable() and renderLevel() and being able to override these methods in a local provider, which is essentially slf4j-simple with a little rendering improvement
> see [https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/?p=maven.git;a=blob;f=maven-slf4j-provider/src/main/script/patch-slf4j-simple.groovy;h=bba864662f70a2ed06aa9a4c5da50df895d7bbed;hb=HEAD]
> Having these changes directly in slf4j simple provider should not change much things, and would avoid us the Groovy patch dependency: the provider will still be required, since we can't have 2 providers in the classpath, and adding real extension/configuration to slf4j simple is much more complex



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.3.1#73012)
_______________________________________________
slf4j-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/slf4j-dev
Loading...