I found this, looks promising: https://stackoverflow.com/a/4717025
On 12 August 2016 at 19:15, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: > In Maven, is there a global way to exclude a dependency? Perhaps we just > need to show people how to do this? > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2016/08/13, at 8:54, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > However, as to #3, it looks like we may need to extend this upgrade epic > to non-Apache projects if possible to try and fix up the dependencies. > > Or wouldn't it be a neat feature for Maven to just transitively ban a > dependency and provide a replacement? Perhaps this is more of a build tool > problem at this point. > > On 12 August 2016 at 18:51, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It may sound somewhat smug, but OSGi doesn't really have the dependency >> hell problems addressed there. It has other annoyances, but you can run >> multiple versions of the same library in the same JVM without them even >> knowing about each other for instance. Plus, OSGi users have a full logging >> service pack called pax-logging (I commit there sometimes) which pulls >> together all the common logging APIs and redirects them to log4j 1.2, log4j >> 2.x, or logback, along with some additional contextual data which I find >> pointless honestly. >> >> On 12 August 2016 at 18:05, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Just read this thread: >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6305 >>> >>> Concerns: >>> * User-supplied logging configurations would break >>> * Spark code to suppress some overly verbose logging in dependencies >>> (which ignore config?) -not sure about impact >>> * POM changes to exclude log4j 1.2 - Spark has many many dependencies >>> which bring it back in >>> >>> Mikael, let me know if I missed something. >>> >>> We can do something about #1. >>> Not sure about #2 and #3. >>> >>> Remko >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 2016/08/13, at 7:38, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Yeah, really, what's the alternative? >>> >>> And I do think that completing that Log4j1ConfigurationFactory would be >>> a great way to get people to migrate if they don't even need to update >>> configs. Though I'd hate to come across one of those configs in the wild >>> because it's not nearly as well documented as the 2.x style configs are. >>> >>> On 12 August 2016 at 15:45, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dropping Log4j 1 and doing what instead? Stop logging altogether? >>>> Logback’s configuration isn’t compatible either. >>>> >>>> Ralph >>>> >>>> On Aug 12, 2016, at 9:52 AM, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> There seem to be quite some frustration in some other Apache projects >>>> about migrating from Log4j 1. Especially around configration. Some seem to >>>> consider dropping Log4j completely instead of going for Log4j 2. >>>> >>>> I have taken on Spark, Hadoop and Zookeeper; see links to their Jira >>>> issues from LOG4J2-1473. I could need some help. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
