I think a global change in the doc from log4j2 to log4j 2 would be fine. I'm busy with my grand kids today and part of tomorrow so if you'd like to handle it that would be fine.
Sent from my iPad On Apr 28, 2012, at 2:18 PM, Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > wrote: >> These are all very good points If you would look >> at http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/index.html as one example page >> and help figure out how to change it so that when we are at log4j 2.1.2 the >> page doesn't feel awkward because it is talking about 2.0 then I'd be OK >> with this. I suppose one option would be to change all the log4j2 >> references to "log4j 2.x". > > Yes, that would be fine i think. > > Looking at the Struts pages (we maintain version 1.x and 2.x there > too) there is the talk of Struts 2 simply, even when the versions are > for example Struts 2.3.2. Maybe we can simply talk about log4j 2 (with > space between) which refers to 2.x.x versions? > > By the way, wasn't there a discussion about the capitalization? I > remember we renamed every "Log4php" to "log4php" because it is lower > case. I meanwhile found a few examples with upper case. > > I should mention I am glad to help fixing the naming. ;-) > >> >> FWIW, I've looked at commons lang - http://commons.apache.org/lang/ - and >> you will notice it refers to itself as both lang 3.0 and lang3 because they >> changed both the package name (org.apache.commons.lang3) and the version >> number (3.0). On the other hand, Commons VFS, which I released, is >> documented only as VFS or VFS 2.0 even though it also changed its package >> name to org.apache.commons.vfs2. However, in that case VFS 2.0 was very, >> very similar to VFS 1.x. Commons Math >> - http://commons.apache.org/math/index.html - also seems to refer to itself >> as commons math even though it is also org.apache.commons.math3. > > Yes, thats true. > > Package renaming is recently done when creating a non-bc release. > Since we have different packages as you pointed out below, this is no > problem for us - now. > Later we might have a log4j 3 and we might need to rename package to > org.apache.logging.log4j3. But in the log4j case, I would say this is > 10 years ahead.... > >> >> A difference that we have is that Log4j 1.x used >> >> package - org.apache.log4j >> groupId - log4j >> artifactId - log4j >> >> Where we are now using >> package - org.apache.logging.log4j >> groupId - org.apache.logging.log4j >> artifactId - log4j2-* >> >> Since the package and groupId are already unique from Log4j 1.x the notion >> of having the "2" in the artifactId (or package) isn't necessary. > > I agree. This makes it easier for log4j 2. > > Cheers > Christian > >> >> Ralph >> >> On Apr 28, 2012, at 5:12 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: >> >> Thanks Ralph for explaining the background on this. >> >> Actually I am for version 3. It confuses me to see at leats 3 numbers >> in the name. Imaging the following version number: log4j2 2.2.2-BETA2 >> gives me headache. >> My current fave for version numbers is http://semver.org/ >> >> As you already mentioned, for a major release number bump it is >> natural that bc goes away. That being said I don't see reason why we >> would need to make an explicit 2 after log4j. What, if we would level >> to another log4j? Lets say v3 is not bc with log4j2 2.0. Then we would >> have either log4j3 1.0 or log4j2 3.0. >> >> Basically the name log4j2 as we use it now is a change of the product >> name and we should be carefully with that. It is the same as log4j-xt >> or log4java or log4j-nextgeneration. >> >> I would feel better if we could stick with the original project name >> log4j and just use version numbering to express the changes. >> >> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 1:49 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >> wrote: >> >> I should also mention that there is more than 1 artifact. There currently is >> log4j12-api, log4j2-api, logj42-core, log4j2-jcl, slf4j-impl, >> logj42-flume-og and log4j2-flume-ng. >> >> >> Yes, I agree, this is to consider. By the way, is your plan to always >> release them all at once, giving them all the same version number, or >> are different version numbers for each component allowed? >> >> Cheers >> Christian >> >> >> >> >> >> Ralph >> >> >> >> On Apr 27, 2012, at 4:40 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: >> >> >> Thanks for looking at this. >> >> >> The choices I considered were >> >> >> 1) >> >> <groupId>org.apache.logging.log4j</groupId> >> >> <artifactId>log4j2</artifactId> >> >> <version>1.x<//version> >> >> >> 2) >> >> <groupId>org.apache.logging</groupId> >> >> <artifactId>log4j2</artifactId> >> >> <version>1.x</version> >> >> >> 3) >> >> <groupId>org.apache.logging</groupId> >> >> <artifactId>log4j</groupId> >> >> <version>2.x</version> >> >> >> I preferred 1 but am OK with 2. I didn't like 3 simply because the doc was >> talking about Log4j 2.0 and I quickly realized we would have a 2.1 and then >> the doc would be strange. So I shortened it to Log4j 2 and then thought it >> looked better as log4j2. It just seemed more natural to start numbering >> that at 1.0. >> >> >> Also, 2.0 isn't binary compatible with 1.x (except for the log4j 1.x adapter >> - which can't be 100% compatible either), but that isn't unusual in a major >> release change. >> >> >> Ralph >> >> >> On Apr 27, 2012, at 3:05 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> I saw: >> >> https://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/download.html >> >> >> The release name is for example: >> >> apache-log4j2-1.0-alpha1.tar.gz >> >> >> Isn't this a little bit confusing? >> >> >> I was under the impression it should be like this: >> >> >> <artifactId>log4j</artifactId> >> >> <version>2.0-alpha1-SNAPSHOT</version> >> >> >> Thus the name is log4j 2.0 and not log4j2 1.0. >> >> >> Thoughts? >> >> >> Cheers >> >> Christian >> >> >> -- >> >> http://www.grobmeier.de >> >> https://www.timeandbill.de >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> http://www.grobmeier.de >> https://www.timeandbill.de >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org >> >> > > > > -- > http://www.grobmeier.de > https://www.timeandbill.de > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
