Blogged: https://blogs.apache.org/logging/entry/moving_on_to_log4j_2
Let me know if you want to change anything. Remko On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > > Ralph > > On Jul 16, 2016, at 10:44 PM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2016/07/17, at 3:30, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > That sounds like a great idea. > > On 16 July 2016 at 11:16, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Jul 16, 2016 12:17 AM, "Remko Popma" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Shall we start contacting Apache project that still use Log4j 1 with >> this new information and offer them our assistance in migrating to Log4j 2 >> in order to get ready for Java 9? >> >> I like it! >> > If nobody objects I will write a small post on blogs.apache.org about > this, and then start to contact individual Apache projects. > > Remko > > Gary >> >> > >> > Remko >> > >> > Sent from my iPhone >> > >> > On 2016/07/15, at 2:36, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Where was the GitHub fork when it was EOL'd? Or when development >> effectively stopped 4 years ago? >> >> >> >> >> >> Maybe the hack provided in this thread will be enough for most folks. >> >> >> >> Gary >> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On 14 July 2016 at 12:12, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> And get ready for a GitHub fork... >> >>>> >> >>>> Gary >> >>>> >> >>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I agree. We announced that Log4j 1.2 is end of life. We have a >> replacement that is better than Log4j 1.2 in pretty much every way. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> In my opinion we should >> >>>>> a) make sure Log4j 2 is ready for Java 9 >> >>>>> b) start announcing that Log4j 1.2 will not work with Java 9 so >> people can start planning their migration >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Ralph Goers < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> That was exactly what my “mixed emotions” were about. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Also, I think we are going to have a fair amount of work to really >> support Java 9. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Ralph >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Jul 14, 2016, at 9:44 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> 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 >> >>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition >> >>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action >> >>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> >>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> >>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> -- >> >>>> 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 >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > >
