On 09/04/2010, at 1:26 PM, Curt Arnold wrote: > > On Apr 7, 2010, at 10:36 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > >> Clearly, since Chainsaw V2 is the current version, it seems odd to deliver >> the code for Chainsaw V1. This should be deprecated in a point release, 1.3 >> or 2.0, not in a 1.2.x maintenance release though. > > You could never say with certainty that there is some app out there that > depended on same fragment of Chainsaw or LF5 code to be present. The Eclipse > statement of compatibility phrases this as "API Usage Assumption: Every > aspect of the API matters to some Client." I agree we can't yank anything > out of log4j.jar in a 1.2.x release. > > However, I don't think that anything would prevent us from offering an > alternative lighter jar (or jars) as part of a 1.2.x release. The easiest > would be to strip out Chainsaw 1 and LF5 out from the jar, maybe > log4j-no-gui.jar?
I think it should be the reverse, have a log4j-with-gui. Yes, there may be someone out there dependent on the older API, but I think we can be fairly confident that this is a minority, so flipping it so that the majority get the benefits. Paul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
