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 Ralph Goers <rg...@apache.org> on 2012/06/01 04:36:53 UTC
Re: [maven-reorg] Reorganizations ongoing at forked Git repository
Why would that require a 1.3?
Ralph
On May 31, 2012, at 2:24 PM, "Jacob Kjome" <ho...@visi.com> wrote:
>
> The main point is separate the tools from the library. That means each of Lf5, Chainsaw1, and Chainsaw2 have their own artifacts, separate from Log4j.jar. That's all. This will make Log4j.jar much smaller (by extracting Lf5 and Chainsaw1). Only users that specifically want to use the tools will need to get their appropriate jar. And all will depend upon Log4j.jar. That really doesn't seem too complex to me.
>
>
> Jake
>
> On Thu, 31 May 2012 17:15:47 -0400
> Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> My beef is that I do not want 10 jars to pick from, this is a low level
>> components, give me one jar to rule them all. Or at least give me the
>> option to pick an all-in-one jar. For those who want to save 10KB here and
>> there, they can cherry pick I suppose.
>> Gary
>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>wrote:
>>> Log4j 2 is already a multi-module build. I am not at all sure why you
>>> would want to expend all this effort on a 1.3 when 2.0 should be our next
>>> target.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On May 31, 2012, at 12:46 PM, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi all
>>> > following Christian's rant at Google+:
>>> > https://plus.google.com/102440702937210603575/posts/HbD1fa9NGHY
>>> > I started forking Log4j at GitHub:
>>> > https://github.com/apetrelli/log4j
>>> >
>>> > The first step I did is providing a stub for a multi-module build.
>>> > Assuming that Log4j should be multi-module is fundamental. I don't
>>> > want to start a Maven lesson, you can see anywhere about the benefit
>>> > of having separated modules with well-identified dependencies.
>>> > For now, I have only a parent project (pom type) and a "core" project,
>>> > that soon will go on a diet, moving code in other modules.
>>> >
>>> > About the version, you might notice that I put "1.3.0-SNAPSHOT"
>>> > version because, at the end, you will not recognize Log4j 1.2.x
>>> > artifacts at all. They will be more numerous, smaller and with
>>> > specific dependencies.
>>> >
>>> > Feel free to discuss or to help via forking.
>>> >
>>> > Best regards
>>> > Antonio
>>> >
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>> Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: [maven-reorg] Reorganizations ongoing at forked Git repository
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Antonio Petrelli
<an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/6/1 Ralph Goers <rg...@apache.org>:
>> Why would that require a 1.3?
>
> Just because it will be a complete change in organizations of jars. If
> you want to stick with 1.2.x version scheme it's only a matter of
> changing a version.
Actually I think we should stick with 1.2.
Reasons:
- there was an effort to create log4j 1.3 in the past. This version
has failed and was cancelled. To my knowledge this was the time Ceki
stopped development at the ASF and founded logback/slf4j. Since then
1.2 was releasing bugfix versions from time to time. It would be
confusing for oldschoolers to hear about a new 1.3 version
- we need to show the sign that we maintain 1.2 without breaking the
code. But of course we should show the 2.0 flag. All our marketing
efforts etc should go into 2.0 soon and personally I would like to
avoid efforts in pushing a new version.
As we do not break the code and just require new pom.xml artifacts
which must be touched when a new version comes out I think 1.2.18
would be fine.
Cheers
Christian
> Notice that I am not here to interfere with Log4j team decisions, only
> to help with the build.
Thank you very much! You are welcome!
Cheers
Christian
>
> Antonio
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
--
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: [maven-reorg] Reorganizations ongoing at forked Git repository
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
On Jun 1, 2012, at 12:26 AM, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
> 2012/6/1 Ralph Goers <rg...@apache.org>:
>> Why would that require a 1.3?
>
> Just because it will be a complete change in organizations of jars. If
> you want to stick with 1.2.x version scheme it's only a matter of
> changing a version.
>
> Notice that I am not here to interfere with Log4j team decisions, only
> to help with the build.
Feel free to "interfere". All opinions, suggestions, feedback, etc are welcome!
Ralph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: [maven-reorg] Reorganizations ongoing at forked Git repository
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
2012/6/1 Ralph Goers <rg...@apache.org>:
> Why would that require a 1.3?
Just because it will be a complete change in organizations of jars. If
you want to stick with 1.2.x version scheme it's only a matter of
changing a version.
Notice that I am not here to interfere with Log4j team decisions, only
to help with the build.
Antonio
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org