I think Ralph started a tools repo which we should reuse for this component IMO.
Gary On Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 11:22 Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > I’m in favor of making this its own repo. Making the build, site, and > release process as simple as possible would be great. I can help with the > release process at least. > > Matt Sicker > > > On Oct 15, 2021, at 09:56, Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote: > > > > License headers, `changes.xml` integration, JPMS shizzle(?), etc. I > guess > > we will need to copy quite some plumbing code from Log4j 2. Nevertheless, > > they are all doable. > > I am also in favor of using GitHub all the way down: GitHub Issues for > > issue tracking, GitHub Actions for CI/CD (yes, even CD!), GitHub pages > for > > publishing the Maven-generated site, etc. > > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 4:48 PM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Ed, > >> > >> Your files must have the Apache License header comment, otherwise > running > >> 'mvn apache-rat:check' will fail. > >> > >> Gary > >> > >> > >>> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 09:49 Eduard Gizatullin <edw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello dear log4j team > >>> > >>> Volkan Yazıcı asked me to make maven-shaded-log4j-transformer > >>> <https://github.com/edwgiz/maven-shaded-log4j-transformer> a part of > >>> log4j2 and I tend to accomplish the proposal. > >>> > >>> Can you please confirm that > >>> new sub-module name log4j-maven-shade-plugin is ok > >>> > >>> Any preliminary advice will be appreciated > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Best regards, > >>> Ed > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 1:39 PM Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Thanks for the prompt (and positive!) reply Eduard! > >>>> I think it is best to first lay out the details of the plan in a post > >>> to the > >>>> dev mailing list < > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/mail-lists.html > >>>> . > >>>> For instance, the module name, transformer name, documentation > changes, > >>>> etc. > >>>> This will give others an opportunity to share their feedback and > >>> remarks. > >>>> Then simply create a JIRA < > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/LOG4J2> > >>>> ticket and submit a GitHub <https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2> > >>> PR. > >>>> > >>>> `master` branch targets Log4j 3, which is not released yet. > >>>> It uses a different plugin loading mechanism than the one used in > Log4j > >>> 2. > >>>> Log4j 3 doesn't suffer from this "override of plugins after shading" > >>>> problem. > >>>> Hence, the PR needs to target the `release-2.x` branch. > >>>> > >>>> Also note that since this is a non-trivial contribution, you need to > >>> sign the > >>>> ICLA document <https://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.pdf> and email it > >>> to > >>>> the ASF <secret...@apache.org>. > >>>> Once you have done this, it is good to mention this in the dev mailing > >>>> list. > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 12:26 PM Eduard Gizatullin <edw...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hello Volkan, > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you for letting me know, I'm all for it. > >>>>> > >>>>> Couldn't you please confirm that target branch is master > >>>>> and log4j-maven-plugins is ok as new name of submodule > >>>>> > >>>>> Any other advices will be appreciated, > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Best regards, > >>>>> Ed > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 10:10 AM Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My name is Volkan Yazici and I am a PMC committee member of the ASF > >>>>>> Logging Services, which develops Log4j too. > >>>>>> maven-shaded-log4j-transformer > >>>>>> <https://github.com/edwgiz/maven-shaded-log4j-transformer> plugin > >>>>>> addresses an important shortcoming of the Log4j 2.x plugin design > >>> surfacing > >>>>>> when users want to shade it. We have recently had a chat about it in > >>>>>> the mailing list > >>>>>> < > >>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rcfa4fc8678642a51e3a69dd2b14848fe4e1e5b71de7c99a7b55ff182%40%3Cdev.logging.apache.org%3E > >>>> , > >>>>>> and the maintainers (incl. me) are inclined to ship it as a part of > >>> the > >>>>>> Log4j project. Would you like to contribute it yourself in the form > >>> of a > >>>>>> GitHub PR? Note that this route is subject to update-push-review > >>> cycles, > >>>>>> yet they are pretty rewarding for both parties, IMHO. What do you > >>> think? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Kind regards. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >> >
