Here is another Java 9 headache WRT Android: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1921?focusedCommentId=16076259&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16076259
Gary On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > So 11.0 would have the old name, and 12.0 would have the new name? That > would be fine with me. That also gives us an opportunity to look into > Scalameta for simpler macro portability going forward considering I keep > seeing deprecation warnings all over the place in the existing macro API. > > On 5 July 2017 at 15:15, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]> wrote: > > > But this long package name is already out released for Scala 2.10 and > > 2.11. I suggest we release for 2.12 with the same package name, and then > > maybe change it in the next release. > > > > > > > > On 2017-07-05 22:10, Matt Sicker wrote: > > > >> I've been using the 2.12 snapshot for now, but I'd rather get a released > >> solution. I have one thought that our package name in the Scala API is > too > >> long as most Scala libraries I've used do not use the reverse DNS > package > >> naming scheme. We may be better off renaming it to just log4j as the > root > >> package name there. > >> > >> On 5 July 2017 at 14:15, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> There are a couple of almost finished PRs on GitHub which would be nice > to > >>> include. I'll have a look at LOG4J2-1923 (PR #81) in the comming days. > >>> > >>> It would be good to do something about LOG4J2-1921 (Android support). I > >>> guess it boils down to what level of support for Android we want. Is it > >>> enough that log4j-api works on Android, or do we want log4j-core to > work > >>> as > >>> well? > >>> > >>> Then I would really want to have Scala 2.12 support out. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 2017-07-05 17:28, Matt Sicker wrote: > >>> > >>> I'd be alright with that. We'll just have to push back some goals to > >>>> 2.10. > >>>> I have an outstanding properties change I want to merge, but I don't > >>>> have > >>>> time at the moment to go through and make all the documentation > updates > >>>> it > >>>> requires, so I can push that for 2.10. Same goes for the Scala repo > >>>> since > >>>> I > >>>> want to take a look at the API in more detail before we make a new > major > >>>> release of it. > >>>> > >>>> On 4 July 2017 at 18:12, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> It should be possible. We need to take a hard look at the bugs that > >>>> have > >>>> > >>>>> been reported. Some seem pretty important. > >>>>> > >>>>> Ralph > >>>>> > >>>>> On Jul 4, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi All, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I would live to see our 2.9 at the end of July at the latest. Big > >>>>>> > >>>>>> deadline > >>>>> > >>>>> for me. Is that a possibility? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Gary > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >
