Re: Log4j branding (was: Logging web site)

[Remko Popma <re...@gmail.com>]

I agree very much with actions that make Log4j 2 more visible and
accessible. It is important to consistently communicate the message that
Log4j 1 is the old, legacy, End Of Life library and that we encourage
everyone to move to Log4j 2.

However, it would be a mistake to try to start rebranding Log4j 2 as just
Log4j now. We have been marketing Log4j 2 as the new thing that makes Log4j
cool again. This has been fairly successful. "Log4j 2" has been gaining
recognition and traction in social media and places like StackOverflow.

I think we need to stay consistent with our message. "Log4j 2 is NOT the
Log4j that you knew." "Log4j 2 is different and better than the old Log4j."
"You liked Logback because you were disappointed with Log4j? Try Log4j 2
and be pleasantly suprised!". Etc.

I strongly think that it will be easier to raise awareness of Log4j 2 and
to get people to migrate away from Log4j 1 if we keep the "2" in the name.

Remko


On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

> I have removed Log4j 1 from the main logging site and changed the title to
> just Log4j.  The Log4j site has a link to Log4j 1.  Log4j extras is still
> on the main site but should probably also be moved to the Legacy area of
> the Log4j site.
>
> Also, the Log4j site continues to say Log4j 2 predominantly. I think in
> the next release we should remove the “2” from all the headings. We can
> leave it in the text so that viewers can still tell that it is not Log4j 1,
> but I think it would be good to gradually drop the “2” and just refer to
> the version/release number.
>
> Ralph
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
>