Re: Dependencies for `log4j-jakarta-smtp`

["Piotr P. Karwasz" <pi...@gmail.com>]

Hi Tim,

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 at 19:32, Tim Perry <ti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Will including `com.sun.activation:jakarta.activation` and
> `com.sun.mail:smtp` be a problem on application servers
>  that already include implementations of them? My
> knowledge of the J2EE application servers is incomplete
> for the modern (Java 11+) versions.

You were right on the spot: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-3554

I believe we should remove the implementation artifacts from the POM
and leave just the APIs (as `provided`).

Piotr

Re: Dependencies for `log4j-jakarta-smtp`

[Tim Perry <ti...@gmail.com>]

I kind of like Matt's solution of just telling people to exclude those
artifacts when they don't need them. Otherwise we'll have the same issue in
reverse: requests from people about how to include the "missing"
dependencies....

On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 8:56 PM Piotr P. Karwasz <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Tim,
>
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 at 19:32, Tim Perry <ti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Will including `com.sun.activation:jakarta.activation` and
> > `com.sun.mail:smtp` be a problem on application servers
> >  that already include implementations of them? My
> > knowledge of the J2EE application servers is incomplete
> > for the modern (Java 11+) versions.
>
> You were right on the spot:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-3554
>
> I believe we should remove the implementation artifacts from the POM
> and leave just the APIs (as `provided`).
>
> Piotr
>