On Jan 13, 2018 16:11, "Remko Popma" <[email protected]> wrote:
JDCB doesn’t require an external dependency so why split it off into a separate module? So that core is thinner. Maybe that is not a big deal. Some folks complain more about the size of the API module. Gary This page is outdated now: https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/runtime-dependencies.html (Shameless plug) Every java main() method deserves http://picocli.info > On Jan 14, 2018, at 3:43, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > > I created: > > LOG4J2-2188 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2188> > > Split off JPA support into a new module log4j-jpa > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2188> > > LOG4J2-2187 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2187> > > Split off JDBC support into a new module log4j-jdbc > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2187> > Gary > > On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 10:54 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Jan 13, 2018 09:54, "Mikael Ståldal" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> As usual, I think we should avoid optional dependencies. >> >> >> That means more modules. >> >> Maybe we can start small here with a log4j-jpa module. >> >> Gary >> >> >> >> >>>> On 2018-01-13 10:16, Remko Popma wrote: >>> >>> I meant to keep the jdbc and the generic db package together. >>> >>> log4j-db: generic db + jdbc >>> log4j-jpa: requires javax.persistance >>> >>> We can also keep all of these in a single module `log4j-db` with an >>> optional dependency on javax.persistance. >>> >>> More modules gives more flexibility but also more complexity, so I lean >>> towards keeping things together where possible until the flexibility is >>> really needed. >> >>
