I am surprised too. I only can see in one eye and I have to keep my head facing the ground most of the time but I can still use my iPad and phone.
Mvn site does not build the distribution. I am actually at the dr to get my bandage off but I will check when I get home what you need to run but I think it might be mvn -P release install Sent from my iPhone > On May 25, 2014, at 6:43 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ralph, thank you for your feedback. > (I am actually surprised to hear from you, I thought you'd be out of > commission for a while. Glad you're feeling well so quickly, but be careful > not to overdo it.) > > I've added the log4j-perf module. Initially this has just one microbenchmark > test. > > How do I verify that the microbenchmarks.jar does not get included in the > distribution? > Just run "mvn site"? > > > >> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: >> This is a very good idea. You really don't have a lot to worry about. ASF >> projects can use GPL tools to build or do things like you are suggesting. >> However, we can't ship things that are under the GPL and should not commit >> them to svn. From what you are describing I don't think we would be doing >> that. >> >> The log4j-dist module controls what is included in the release. As I recall >> it is already excluding some things so this be easy to do. However, the >> release zips the whole source tree, so as long as there is nothing GPL there >> we are good. >> >> Fwiw, my surgery is done. I am at home and feeling ok, under the >> circumstances. I can only see from one eye right now so please excuse >> mistakes. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On May 24, 2014, at 10:42 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I've been using JMH (http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jmh/ ) for >>> performance tests recently and I'm very impressed. JMH is developed by the >>> Oracle java performance team and used internally by Oracle to performance >>> tune the JVM and java core libraries. >>> >>> I would like to use JMH to start building a suite of performance tests for >>> log4j2. I would like everyone's thoughts. First, do you like this idea at >>> all? >>> >>> Also, there is one legal and one technical aspect that I would like >>> everyone's feedback on. >>> >>> A potential legal problem is that JMH is made available under GNU GPL v2 >>> with the Classpath Exception, and our Apache License v2 is not compatible >>> with GPL v2 (see http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#GPL ). >>> >>> To solve this, I want to avoid distributing JMH or our executable >>> microbenchmarks (which would have the JMH classes) with our log4j >>> artifacts. I just want our team (and whoever checks out the log4j source) >>> to be able to use JMH to genyerate and run benchmarks when they want to. >>> >>> I'm not a lawyer though. Does anyone have experience with this kind of >>> question? >>> >>> The technical aspect: >>> I propose adding a log4j-perf module. This is where our performance test >>> code would live. JMH microbenchmarks are very simple java classes with >>> org.openjdk.jmh annotations. During the build, JMH generates code and that >>> generated code, together with all dependencies are zipped up in a large >>> uber-jar with the maven Shade plugin. You can then use java -jar >>> microbenchmarks.jar to run performance tests. >>> >>> To ensure that the log4j-perf artifacts are not included in the log4j2 >>> distribution, we could simply leave out the "<module>log4j-perf</module>" >>> line from log4j2/pom.xml. The drawback is that you'd need to manually add >>> that line and build again if you want to execute microbenchmarks to test >>> something that only exists in your workspace. Is there a better way, to >>> somehow include the log4j-perf module in the build, but exclude its >>> artifacts from the log4j2 distribution? >
