[logback-dev] Logback PR #352: Add appender for TestNG Reporter

[Ceki Gülcü]

I agree that with hindsight the inclusion of DBAppender in Logback might 
have been a mistake. If it were today, it probably would have not made 
the cut.

My offer to reference ReporterAppender from logback's web-site still 
stands.

On 1/12/2017 7:08, Scott Babcock wrote:
> The set of appenders provided by the main Logback project includes
> implementations for nine vendor-specific database products. The target
> audience for each of these database appenders is significantly smaller
> than the target audience for the TestNG  Reporter appender provided by
> this PR.
>
>
> In a recent survey of dependency references in GitHub, the TestNG
> library comes in at #20 on the list of the top 100 most frequently used
> libraries. The only database flavor that comes close to this level of
> popularity is MySQL, which came in at #26. HSQL comes in at #54, and the
> remaining SQL flavors didn't make it onto the Top 100 list.
>
>
> I can migrate the TestNG Reporter appender to a companion project
> without the need to duplicate core unit test classes, by adding a
> "test-jar" dependency to my Maven project. While this is functional,
> it's less than ideal, as it makes this appender more difficult for
> potential users to find.
>
>
> Does any of these factors tip the balance in favor of incorporating this
> new appender into the main Logback project?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* logback-dev <logback-dev-bounces at qos.ch> on behalf of Ceki Gülcü
> <ceki at qos.ch>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2017 1:00 PM
> *To:* logback developers list
> *Subject:* Re: [logback-dev] Logback PR #352: Add appender for TestNG
> Reporter
>
> Hi Scoot,
>
> Thank you for posting your question on this list.
>
> ReporterAppender is probably not useful enough for a wider audience. As
> such, I do not think it is advisable to incorporate it into logback proper.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Ceki
>
> On 1/11/2017 21:29, Scott Babcock wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>
>> My PR #352 (https://github.com/qos-ch/logback/pull/352) was closed,
>> stating that it’s not generic enough. Given that TestNG is the most
>> widely used Java testing framework in the world, how much more generic
>> does a Logback logger need to be for it to be included in the mainline
>> project?
>>
>>
>>
>> The primary challenge with spinning this up as a separate project is
>> that much of the basic building blocks for developing loggers and unit
>> tests haven’t been defined or published in a form that facilitates
>> extension and importation of these existing declarations. Consequently,
>> it’s necessary to duplicate a significant volume of the implementation
>> from the mainline project into the companion logger project. This is
>> terribly inefficient and exposes the external project to the risk of
>> breakage as revisions are applied to the mainline project that aren’t
>> automatically picked up by the companion project.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please advise.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> = Scott Babcock =
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> logback-dev mailing list
> logback-dev at qos.ch
> http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> logback-dev mailing list
> logback-dev at qos.ch
> http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-dev
>