On Sep 30, 2016 7:15 PM, "Remko Popma" <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Can anyone send a link to the release procedures?
http://wiki.apache.org/logging/Log4j2ReleaseGuide Gary > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 1 Oct 2016, at 2:31, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > >> I would have a “core” project and an “extras”, “extensions” or some other name. They are all already separate jars. I just want to split them out because they don’t (or shouldn’t) change nearly as often as the core stuff - although we may get to the point where core is pretty stable and we are actually adding to the extensions more than we are working on core. >> >> If you look at Maven it has every plugin in its own project. I am not really looking for that. I am just looking for ways to make the release process less time consuming. >> >> Ralph >> >> >> >>> On Sep 30, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Increased modularity is the OSGi way, but it's also a hard thing to convince people of. I've met many developers (notably Spring fanboys) that are still in a monolithic classpath mindset of "why bother splitting this up?" >>> >>> Anyways, Ralph, are you proposing spinning out the non-core stuff into a single Logging Services project, or multiple ones that can be released as needed? >>> >>> On 30 September 2016 at 12:05, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Right, hence this thread ;-) I am not hot about having multiple builds FYIW. >>>> >>>> Gary >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Oh wait, Ralph is talking about something else entirely. >>>>> >>>>> On 30 September 2016 at 11:58, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I think log4j-nosql could be merged into log4j-core. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 30 September 2016 at 11:50, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ralph recently mentions that he'd like some modules removed while Matt mentioned merging some back into Core. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Shall we discuss this on the ML instead of Jira? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I could also see doing an uber jar (mod the mutually exclusive jars) and reorging the system with a smaller core (everything except appenders), an all-appenders module, and/or what some folks have mentioned: one module per appender (yikes!) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What are all the options we should consider? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Personally and for the current projects I have involved in, an uber jar with optional deps is the simplest to deal with. If I had to do an app for a light bulb, I'd think differently ;-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (Let's leave Java 9 modules out of the discussion!) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gary >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >>>>>>> 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 <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >>>> 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 <boa...@gmail.com> >> >>
