On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
> I attempted a release, and we fixed something, but I was still unsure as to > how to build the website as the site:stage goal fails with missing file > errors if I recall correctly. Since then, I've been busy with a short term > work project eating up all my energy, so I haven't had a chance to make > another rc, though without the site, it's not really a release now is it? > :/ > Well, strictly speaking, Apache delivers sources (see Subversion), binaries and site? Pft! A mere convenience! Just JOKING of course. Putting our jars in Maven Central is a must these days. Gary > > On 6 July 2017 at 15:35, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Don’t we still need to get Scala integrated into the web site? Can we do > > that before the 2.9 release? Or has a Scala release not been done yet? > > > > Ralph > > > > > On Jul 6, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Yes, I think that the 11.0 release of the Scala API should only be what > > we currently have in 2.8.2 plus Scala 2.12 support plus the already > > implemented ThreadContext wrapper in LOG4J2-1690. > > > > > > Basically just release what we currently have in the > logging-log4j-scala > > Git repo. > > > > > > > > > On 2017-07-05 23:28, Matt Sicker 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >
