Any Log4j 1 release is likely to open the floodgates of requests to fix any
outstanding "simple" (or complex) bugs.

Keep in mind that Java 9 is not official yet, so we could be opening
ourselves to a series of Java 9 EA compatible releases as Java 9 with and
without Jigsaw (these are still separate builds IIRC) gets developed.

Tracking Java 9 EAs with Log4j 2 is likely to be enough work as it is... if
we do want to do that now...

Gary

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote:

> Strategically I don't see why doing another 1.2 release would be a good
> idea.
> If people can upgrade to Java 9 with all the regression testing that
> implies, then I see no reason they would not also upgrade to Log4j 2...
> Naturally Log4j 2 needs to be in good shape for Java 9 and we would
> support users who did customizations to Log4j 1.2.
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> That would rule out building on a Mac.  I’d have to try it from a Linux
>> VM.  I think Gary might have built Log4j 1 in the past.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On Jul 14, 2016, at 8:52 AM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Matt, I guess you need JDK 1.4.2 on your machine to have artifact
>> "sun.jdk:tools:jar:1.4.2".
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Paul
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> How do you even build log4j 1.2? I get this error when I build from
>>> trunk:
>>>
>>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
>>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2:run (javadoc.resources) on
>>> project log4j: Execution javadoc.resources of goal
>>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2:run failed: Plugin
>>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2 or one of its dependencies
>>> could not be resolved: Could not find artifact sun.jdk:tools:jar:1.4.2 at
>>> specified path
>>> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_66.jdk/Contents/Home/jre/../Classes/classes.jar
>>> -> [Help 1]
>>>
>>> On 14 July 2016 at 10:47, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why would we want to do that? We need to make sure that Log4j 2 works
>>>> well with Java 9, but otherwise I think this is an excellent opportunity
>>>> for users to upgrade to Log4j 2.
>>>>
>>>> Remko
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> According to this poster, it appears 1.x is not compatible with JDK 9:
>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2016-July/008654.html
>>>>>
>>>>> I told them I would notify our development community. So here's the
>>>>> notification. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Given how widely used 1.x is still, what do you guys think of one more
>>>>> 1.x release? Usually I would never entertain the suggestion, but this may
>>>>> be the one time the justification makes sense. For those who still use 1.x
>>>>> and have no time to upgrade to 2.x, I can't think of a better way to
>>>>> support the user community than fix this issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> PS: Inside the post is a link to the supposed patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Reply via email to