Re: Log4j module deprecation

Hi all, On Thu, 28 Sept 2023 at 09:35, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: > We know that statistics are not everything and that is why we would > like to hear your opinion on these modules. The discussion will be > open for a month, after which the PMC will announce a definitive list > of deprecations. It

Re: Log4j module deprecation

On Fri, Sep 29, 2023, at 21:40, Ralph Goers wrote: > I believe I shared my misgivings to these two modules since this was > first brought up. I may not have said I am -1 but I definitely never > said “go for it”. I see. Well, I got a different impression when re-reading the discussion, I was

Re: Log4j module deprecation

I believe I shared my misgivings to these two modules since this was first brought up. I may not have said I am -1 but I definitely never said “go for it”. Ralph > On Sep 29, 2023, at 5:36 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > > From an observer of this discussion: > > And I was thinking we have

Re: Log4j module deprecation

>From an observer of this discussion: And I was thinking we have had this discussion over at dev@. I am surprised we have seen something which I understood as agreement and then, when we tell the users about our plans, we reopen this discussion. This must be very frustrating for Piotr who

Re: Log4j module deprecation

I created the docker and Kubernetes modules. Originally my employer used them when sending data directly via TCP to a forwarder. However, we ran into reliability issues with the forwarder when doing that so we switched to writing to the console, despite benchmarks showing it is slower. But for

Re: Log4j module deprecation

* For the Cassandra appender, I’m ok with deprecation. I had added this plugin a while back partly as a demo to show how to write plugins and for some consulting-related use cases, but I haven’t used this in quite some time as I’d lean toward some form of queue middleware between logs and a

Re: Log4j module deprecation

Thanks so much for the feedback Wayne, we really appreciate it. I couldn't follow what you mean with "Java wrappers". Could you elaborate on it, please? Could you give some concrete examples? What was missing? What did you implement? What does it have to do with JNDI and logging? On Thu, Sep 28,

Re: Log4j module deprecation

Volkan, A vote to retain JNDI-related features. Although I don't use JNDI regularly, I have used it several times in the last decade for a Fortune 100 company to create Java wrappers when commercial libraries don't provide a Java interface -- most recently for a commercial product using one

Re: Log4j module deprecation

I have cross-posted this to GitHub Discussions too. Feel free to participate there, if that is of your preference. On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 9:35 AM Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: > Hi all, > > We always strive to only release