On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Antonio Petrelli <antonio.petre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/5/31 Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>: >> Log4j 2 is already a multi-module build. I am not at all sure why you would >> want to expend all this effort on a 1.3 when 2.0 should be our next target. > > I agree, however Christian says that 1.x is still maintained and the > last build of 1.2.x was a nightmare. Anyway, I suggest Christian to > jump into the discussion because he can explain it better than me.
We have no fixed release date for log4j 2.0. This is of course the successor of log4j 1. But as long as we have no proper release (means GA ready) we need to maintain the old codebase. Otherwise users will ask us why they should use 2.0, when we were not able to maintain 1.x. And, of course, even when 2.0 is avail it does not mean everybody can/wants to migrate immediately. there is so much software using log4j1, I expect it takes a long while until we can speak of an EOL. That being said: 1.2 build is horrible and complex. It took ages to get us all the necessary votes. Not everybody is able to build it completely. It is not possible to make some "small reversible steps" here, we need to clean up - or we face the situation to not longer be able to maintain log4j1. This is how I see it - therefore I would like to put some good effort in cleaning up the build and release bugfixes form time to time, while the huge efforts go into log4j 2.0 Cheers Christian > Antonio > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
