I also considered starting with version 1.0, but since we've already
released a few versions in the 2.x line of this exact groupId/artifactId
combo, it wouldn't make sense to start anywhere earlier than 2.8.2
currently.

On 16 July 2017 at 13:52, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:

> This only requires log4j-api as a dependency, and as we've seen in
> log4j-core et al, we can require a minimum log4j-api version and simply
> release the Scala API after log4j-core releases. It'll be too confusing if
> the version numbers were similar.
>
> Perhaps it might make more sense to use version 3.0 or 10.0 as the initial
> release. Akka HTTP used version 10.0 as its initial release when they
> separated it out from Akka (which is at version 2.5.x right now, so a
> rather similar versioning issue there).
>
> On 16 July 2017 at 13:46, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Would it be unreasonable to call this Log4jScala? Then you do not have to
>> deal with the whole "for Log4j API" postfix.
>>
>> Alternatively "*Log4j API **wrapper **for Scala 2.10 11.0*"
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > This is version 11.0 of the Scala 2.10 wrapper for Log2j API.
>> >
>> > "version 11.0" applies to "Scala 2.10 wrapper for Log2j API", not to
>> > "Log2j API". The Maven output make this a bit unclear, not sure what we
>> can
>> > do about it.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2017-07-16 20:32, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]
>> >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]
>> >
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> This is confusing. What are we doing an RC for here? One wrapper? Or
>> all
>> >>>> of them? Why is this version 11? There is no version 11 of anything.
>> >>>> There
>> >>>> is Scala 2.11 that I see. Is this a typo?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> When I dig a round the repo site from the link, I found a distro zip,
>> >>>> which includes ALL the wrappers. OK, good. It would have been
>> helpful to
>> >>>> include the link to the thing I can build from: the distro zip.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So, why is this version 11? It makes no sense to me. There must have
>> >>>> been
>> >>>> an ML discussion I skipped.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> "Building Scala 2.10 wrapper for Log4j API 11.0"
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> So this should really be:
>> >>
>> >> "Building Scala 2.10 wrapper for Log4j *Scala *API 11.0"
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Since there is no Log4j API 11.0...
>> >>
>> >> Gary
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Uh?
>> >>>
>> >>> Gary
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> Gary
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hello all, sorry for the delay between release candidates. This is a
>> >>>>> vote
>> >>>>> to release RC2 of Log4j Scala API 11.0, the first release of the new
>> >>>>> repository. The main features in this release are Scala 2.12 support
>> >>>>> and
>> >>>>> an
>> >>>>> API for manipulating the ThreadContext.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Artifacts are available in this staging repository: <
>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>> >>>>> logging-1028/>.
>> >>>>> The site is on <https://rgoers.github.io/log4j-scala-site/> (though
>> >>>>> it's
>> >>>>> not appearing for me at the time of writing). Don't mind the styling
>> >>>>> issues
>> >>>>> in component pages as these will point to the correct paths when
>> merged
>> >>>>> with the existing site.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The artifacts are signed with my GPG key with the
>> >>>>> ID 748F15B2CF9BA8F024155E6ED7C92B70FA1C814D which is available in
>> the
>> >>>>> Logging KEYS file.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Artifacts can be downloaded using the following command:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> wget -e robots=off --cut-dirs=7 -nH -r -p -np --no-check-certificate
>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>> >>>>> logging-1028/org/apache/logging/log4j/
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> If that doesn't work, please let me know so I can note the correct
>> >>>>> command
>> >>>>> for future vote emails.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>



-- 
Matt Sicker <[email protected]>

Reply via email to