> On Dec 19, 2021, at 3:48 PM, Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Matt>but at least one release using the normal ASF release requirements is
> required to graduate.
>
> Thanks for the reminder, and I am sure preparing the release won't be an
> issue. I refactored release scripts for both Calcite and JMeter, and I am
> sure log4j 1.x is doable.
>
>> compared to the alternatives discussed in this thread.
>
> I must be missing the alternarives.
> Can you please highlight them?
The only thing I heard was that the original request was to release 1.2.18 with
the minimum changes to address security issues. Then the project would go
dormant again.
With this approach it doesn’t seem worth it to reactivate Bugzilla or create a
Jira for Log4j 1, movie it to GitHub, etc.
Ralph
>
> There were multiple suggestions and various PRs from external contributora,
> yet the committers respond with vaugue messages.
>
> The code must be buildable, so moving to Git, and adding GitHub CI is the
> mandatory step.
> Of course, the existing PMC members and committers might have opinions on
> the way to fix the issues, however I see no reasons for the team to deny
> Git.
>
> The migration to Git consumes absolutely no resources from committers,
> except a couple of +1 votes.
>
> Unfortunately, even a trivial improvement like Git is ignored by Logging
> PMC.
>
> So I take Ralph's suggestion to reestablish the new PMC for log4j 1.x
> seriously.
>
> Vladimir
