That’s the same thing SLF4J did - See http://slf4j.org/faq.html#excludingJCL <http://slf4j.org/faq.html#excludingJCL>. Unfortunately, Maven doesn’t directly support it so you have to use one of these hacks.
Ralph > On Aug 12, 2016, at 5:35 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > I found this, looks promising: https://stackoverflow.com/a/4717025 > <https://stackoverflow.com/a/4717025> > > On 12 August 2016 at 19:15, Remko Popma <[email protected] > <mailto:[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] > <mailto:[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] >> <mailto:[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] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Just read this thread: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6305 >> <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] >> <mailto:[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] >>> <mailto:[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] >>>> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
