Could you please wait until next week? I would like to do some additional compatibility testing, I just need a little more time. I will notify you when I am done with it.
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > The patch was modified to address the review comments. If there are no > other comments I will merge the branch this weekend. > > Ralph > > > On Nov 6, 2017, at 10:09 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > wrote: > > > > FWIW, the pull request was modified to remove the extraneous files. > Please review. > > > > Ralph > > > >> On Nov 3, 2017, at 8:58 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > wrote: > >> > >> I have submitted https://github.com/apache/flume/pull/181 < > https://github.com/apache/flume/pull/181> to implement this. The only > component still dependent on log4j 1.x is Flume’s Log4j Appender. > >> > >> Ralph > >> > >>> On Oct 21, 2016, at 3:23 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> I should point out that Log4j 2 has shipped a Flume Appender since > before it went GA. The Flume Log4j Appender is for users who use Log4j 1.x > to connect to Flume. There really is no reason to drop that even if Flume > itself starts using Log4j 2. Since Flume is a standalone app there really > isn’t anything that requires a break in compatibility. > >>> > >>> Ralph > >>> > >>>> On Oct 21, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Attila Simon <s...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi Lior, > >>>> > >>>> Thanks a lot! Based on these it is indeed flume 2.0 and I have no > objection > >>>> having it than (don't know when it will be but hope we can speed up > the > >>>> release cycles). > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Attila > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> *Attila Simon* > >>>> Software Engineer > >>>> Email: s...@cloudera.com > >>>> > >>>> [image: Cloudera Inc.] > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Lior Zeno <liorz...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Sure. > >>>>> > >>>>> First, the Log4jAppender will be deprecated. Log4j2 already provides > a > >>>>> Flume appender [1]. > >>>>> Second, since we use almost exclusively the SLF4j API in Flume, the > code > >>>>> will only slightly change. The major difference is with the > configuration > >>>>> files which have changed from 1.x to 2.x [2]. > >>>>> > >>>>> [1] > >>>>> https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/appenders. > html#FlumeAppender > >>>>> [2] https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/migration.html. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Attila Simon <s...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Lior, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Could you please explain a bit what will break? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>> Attila > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Tuesday, 18 October 2016, Lior Zeno <liorz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi All, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Log4j (v1) has been EOL'ed over a year now ( > >>>>>>> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/apache_ > >>>>>> logging_services_project_ > >>>>>>> announces) > >>>>>>> and is no longer officially supported. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I propose we migrate to Log4j 2. We can begin with using the Log4j > 1.x > >>>>>>> bridge, and then incrementally move the whole codebase. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Since this is a breaking change, I think we should schedule this to > >>>>> Flume > >>>>>>> 2.0.0. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> *Attila Simon* > >>>>>> Software Engineer > >>>>>> Email: s...@cloudera.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [image: Cloudera Inc.] > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > >
