OK. The module is commented out along with the update to changes.xml. Ralph
> On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:56 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sounds good to me. I'd rather get some more features in for 2.10.0 first. > > On 11 September 2017 at 18:33, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I’d be OK with not publishing log4j-appserver right now but I’d prefer to >>> leave the module in but remove it from the parent pom so that it doesn’t >>> get built or deployed. Then I don’t think it has to be added to the >> release >>> notes even though it technically is still part of the source release. >>> >>> Does anyone have a problem with that? >>> >> >> Sounds reasonable. >> >> Gary >> >> >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 12:13 PM, Mikael Ståldal <mi...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> I don't think we should decide the versioning based on number of >>> classes/methods/LOC added. We should decide it based on features added. A >>> new feature warrants a bump in minor version, so the app server support >>> should be in 2.10.0. >>>> >>>> We could also descope the app server support for now, and release 2.9.1 >>> without it. I think that would be good given that we had quite some >>> regressions in 2.9.0. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2017-09-11 17:34, Ralph Goers wrote: >>>>> I thought about that, but it really is a pretty minor addition - it is >>> one class. That said, if others feel that 2.10.0 is better I am happy to >>> accommodate. >>>>> Ralph >>>>>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 8:31 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>> >>>>>> It seems to me that the recent addition of the log4j-appserver module >>>>>> requires a version bump to 2.10.0, not 2.9.1. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gary >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I still have my outstanding branch that didn't make it into 2.9.0 >>> that's >>>>>>> ready to merge, though if you're ready to do a bugfix release like >>> that, >>>>>>> I'd rather wait for that first. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 11 September 2017 at 03:43, Mikael Ståldal <mi...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sounds good. Have we fixed all discovered regressions and new bugs >> in >>>>>>>> 2.9.0? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2017-09-11 09:39, Apache wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I am thinking about doing the Log4J 2.9.1 release at the end of >> the >>> week >>>>>>>>> as there are a couple of bugs I'd like published by the time Java >> 9 >>> is >>>>>>>>> released. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
