I do too.

Ralph

On Apr 10, 2013, at 7:46 AM, Nick Williams 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://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com 
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to