While it may sound reasonable, it is not. Matt’s point about LoggerFinder and our support of NoSQL appenders and the like is proof that there are valid reasons for circularities. We are just lucky that Jackson and Disruptor don’t seem to do logging or we would have circularities there too.
BTW - I got a private answer to my question on this. It was that I should post my question to the jigsaw dev list but that I should expect that Log4j - or at least pieces of it - can’t be modularized. Ralph > On May 9, 2017, at 8:24 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On May 9, 2017 12:18 AM, "Remko Popma" <remko.po...@gmail.com > <mailto:remko.po...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > Mark Reinhold's reasoning in his response (http://mail.openjdk.java.net/ > pipermail/jpms-spec-experts/2017-May/000695.html) makes sense to me. > > > Sounds reasonable indeed. Reading this latest sounds like JBoss has a lot > of work to do in order to fit in Java 9 modules from its own module system > and they'd rather not do more work than less, which is understandable. MR's > view on a conservative first cut makes sense. It is so late in the Java 9 > timeframe that these change requests seem doomed anyway. > > Gary
