IIUC sfl4j 2.0.0 API is the same as 1.7.x API, so from a Wicket perspective it doesn't matter if we ship with 2.0.0 or 1.7.x, right?
If that is the case, I suggest we fall back to 1.7.x, and note that one can easily upgrade to 2.0.0 without issue if someone so desires. This will keep it working for most folks, yet give an upgrade path for those that wish so. It is harder to convince someone to downgrade from 2.0 to 1.7 than to upgrade to 2.0 from 1.7. But this is my .02 (which is even worth less with the current exchange rates). Martijn On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 9:15 AM Martin Grigorov <mgrigo...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I have one concern - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6958 > > Some history: > Some time ago I have upgraded slf4j-api from 1.7.x to > 2.x-alpha/beta/stable. The reason to do it was because 2.x is a JSPM > module. > SLF4J 2.x is API compatible with 1.7.x but there is a difference - 1.7.x > uses static binding, 2.x uses ServiceLoader. So the application should use > an SLF4J implementation for the respective API version! > An (non-OSGi) application can easily downgrade the used version by > declaring an explicit dependency to 1.7.x. > But! > WICKET-6958 has problems in OSGi environment due to the Import-Package > directive in the META-INF/MANIFEST file. Bnd (via maven-bundle-plugin) sets > the value to [2,3) and it seems this makes it hard for the user application > to downgrade to 1.7.x > > Here are the options I see: > 1) do nothing, just mark it as a known issue > 2) change the version back to 1.7.x > 3) investigate what should be done by maven-bundle-plugin to set the value > manually to [1.7,3). I expected that the issue reporter will do it but he > waits for us... > > > Martin > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 2:14 PM Andrea Del Bene <an.delb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Looks like we have enough material to promote a new release. WDYT? > > > > -- > > Andrea Del Bene. > > Apache Wicket committer. > > > -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
