That may be more of a documentation task. Although I had to remove revapi from 
3.0 due to all the changes I doubt they will impact very many users. I know the 
work I did on moving the plugin support is backward compatible.

Ralph

> On Aug 21, 2019, at 10:27 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Plus the story of how we approach backward compatibility with 2.x in
> 3.x (e.g., renamed package, compatibility shims, etc.)
> 
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 at 12:19, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> The stability should be fine. We have continually port all bug fixes and 
>> enhancements on the release-2.x branch to master. The main goal of 3.0 is to 
>> split up the core module and to make each module a valid Java Module. We 
>> have not completely finished that work. Basically, that is the only thing 
>> holding up its release.  Right now Log4j 3 is targeted at Java 8 but we 
>> might want to consider making the base Java 9 to make our life easier as 
>> there is a whole bunch of code we could dump if we did that.
>> 
>> Ralph
>> 
>>> On Aug 21, 2019, at 10:11 AM, Gregg Donovan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Ralph, that makes sense as a way forward.
>>> 
>>> Do you have any estimates on when 3.0 might be GA and/or an estimate of the
>>> stability of the current snapshot release? We'll likely stick with our fork
>>> in production until 3.0 is GA.
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 12:58 PM Ralph Goers <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I think you need to try with a SNAPSHOT of 3.0.  As I mentioned in a
>>>> previous email 3.0 now longer generates a .dat file but generates a Java
>>>> source file that gets compiled with your source code instead. It also
>>>> requires a .service file for ServiceLoader but those should be handled out
>>>> of the box by shading tools.
>>>> 
>>>> Ralph
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 21, 2019, at 9:20 AM, Gregg Donovan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm working on getting Etsy's custom StackdriverJsonLayout Log4J plugin
>>>> to
>>>>> work with our Bazel-based build system and wanted to run a few ideas by
>>>> you.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The first problem I ran into was stdout messages breaking the
>>>>> PluginProcessor annotation processor when run by Bazel. My PR here[1]
>>>> fixed
>>>>> that for us.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The problem we have now is with "fat jars" and the plugin cache
>>>>> file
>>>> (META-INF/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/config/plugins/Log4j2Plugins.dat)[2].
>>>>> When Bazel builds a "deploy" jar, it combines an application's classes
>>>> and
>>>>> the classes of its transitive dependencies into a single "fat" JAR.
>>>> During
>>>>> this process it needs to intelligently combine any duplicate JAR entries
>>>> it
>>>>> finds.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Right now, Bazel does not know about the plugin cache file[3], so it
>>>> keeps
>>>>> the first one it encounters and discards any others. So, our custom
>>>>> plugin's plugin cache file is discarded in the process.[4]
>>>>> 
>>>>> Even if Bazel knew about the plugin cache file, I don't think the binary
>>>>> format is easily concatenated, due to the length header. [5]
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have a few suggestions for fixing this that I'd like to run by you all
>>>>> before submitting a patch:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Make the .dat files concatenateable, either textually (i.e. inserting a
>>>> \n
>>>>> between combined files) or as binary data (i.e. no inserted bytes). This
>>>>> makes the job of the build tool much easier.
>>>>> There seem to be two options:
>>>>> a) Move from a binary format to textual (say, tab delimited PluginEntry
>>>>> fields) and combine the dat files as plain text.
>>>>> If this option is chosen, we could either teach Bazel's DefaultJarEntry
>>>>> filter to combine the plugin cache file textually or move it into
>>>>> META-INF/services, where all files are combined as textual data.[6]
>>>>> 
>>>>> b) Remove the length header and allow the .dat files to be combined as
>>>>> binary data.
>>>>> If we choose this option, we would need to teach Bazel's
>>>>> DefaultJarEntryFilter to combine the plugin cache file as binary, as it
>>>>> does for proto files.[7]
>>>>> 
>>>>> What do you think? Thanks for the consideration!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Gregg
>>>>> 
>>>>> [1]: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/301
>>>>> [2]:
>>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/blob/cd87dd40405166a4d5f6707a27cbaf7ddcf833b6/log4j-plugins/src/main/java/org/apache/logging/log4j/plugins/processor/PluginProcessor.java#L67
>>>>> [3]:
>>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/master/src/java_tools/singlejar/java/com/google/devtools/build/singlejar/DefaultJarEntryFilter.java
>>>>> [4]:
>>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/0d39361075b05919618720f961870d3863a726ac/src/java_tools/singlejar/java/com/google/devtools/build/singlejar/ZipEntryFilter.java#L87:L91
>>>>> [5]:
>>>>> -
>>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/blob/92d19c8da6591a706a2df9875c7e41f6fb20bd66/log4j-core/src/main/java/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/config/plugins/processor/PluginCache.java#L73
>>>>> -
>>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/blob/92d19c8da6591a706a2df9875c7e41f6fb20bd66/log4j-core/src/main/java/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/config/plugins/processor/PluginCache.java#L101
>>>>> [6]:
>>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/447e0f1aedb1d83feba2298b1e251b4e34ed9a70/src/java_tools/singlejar/java/com/google/devtools/build/singlejar/DefaultJarEntryFilter.java#L99:L101
>>>>> [7]:
>>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/447e0f1aedb1d83feba2298b1e251b4e34ed9a70/src/java_tools/singlejar/java/com/google/devtools/build/singlejar/DefaultJarEntryFilter.java#L115:L117
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
> 


Reply via email to