And better documentation would help too :) Gary
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Nick Williams < [email protected]> wrote: > I like that idea. > > Nick > > On Apr 10, 2013, at 9:43 AM, Remko Popma wrote: > > About the mutual exclusivity, would it be an idea to throw an exception > from either log4j-slf4j-impl or log4j-to-slf4j when it detects that the > other jar is on the classpath? > I just proposed a way to do that in > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-204 > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Nick Williams <[email protected]> > *To:* Log4J Developers List <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 10, 2013 11:37 PM > *Subject:* Re: Maven Group Ids > > I'm guessing there's no way to tell Maven that two dependencies are > mutually exclusive and cannot both be used (for example, log4j-slf4j-impl > and log4j-to-slf4j)? Because that would be convenient... > > Nick > > On Apr 10, 2013, at 9:30 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > Well, I originally had them all in one groupId but it was suggested that > they be split to distinguish core functionality from the extra stuff. That > did and still does make sense to me, although using the groupId may not be > the best way to distinguish it. It might be done simply through a better > web site design. We have had a couple of users now include all the jars in > their project. The different groupIds hasn't stopped that. To be honest, > I'm not really sure what would. > > I have no problem switching back to a single groupId if that is the > consensus, but we really need to lock that down as we can't be doing that > after 2.0 GA is released. > > Ralph > > On Apr 10, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All: > > I find it confusing to have >1 group Id, for example in Ivy, when I tried > > <dependency org="org.apache.logging.log4j" name="log4j-api" > rev="2.0-beta4" /> > <dependency org="org.apache.logging.log4j" name="log4j-core" > rev="2.0-beta4" /> > <dependency org="org.apache.logging.log4j" name="log4j-1.2-api" > rev="2.0-beta4" /> > > it bombed because the 1.2 API is in "org.apache.logging.log4j.adapter" not > "org.apache.logging.log4j" > > What is the point of this complication? It's bad enough we have a bunch of > jars, but multiple group ids? > > Gary > > -- > E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] > JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977/>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 > Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > > > > > > > -- E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
