That's the first thing that came up when I googled "log4j ear". Gary
<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Ralph Goers <[email protected]> </div><div>Date:11/01/2014 01:32 (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: Log4J Developers List <[email protected]> </div><div>Subject: Re: Web site version confusion </div><div> </div>Why is it confusing? How did you even find that link? If you go to logging.apache.org and select Log4j 2 you end up at logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x, which is the correct link as it was always planned that the main link should be an abstraction to whatever the current version is. 2.0 is nothing more than a link to 2.x. I suspect it may have been created at a time when Log4j was being reference to as Log4j 2.0, not Log4j 2. It probably should just be deleted. As far as I can recall it has never been used as the main link to the site. I am not aware of anything that references that link. FWiW, if you want to you can view any version of the the web site. For example, http://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.0-beta7/, http://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.0/, or http://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.1/. I’m not in favor of adding 2.1 as the 2.1 site is already there and is the current link. As I said, the main site link (or links) shouldn’t imply any specific version. Ralph On Oct 31, 2014, at 8:38 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: This exists: https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.0/manual/webapp.html But this does not https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.1/manual/webapp.html It's confusing. IMO both should be there. Gary -- E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition JUnit in Action, Second Edition Spring Batch in Action Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
