Now that I have had 10 seconds to think about it. The change to the property
syntax and how PropertiesUtil works will create serious problems for what you
are proposing.
Ralph
> On Jan 17, 2024, at 10:02 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> The quick answer to this question is “I don’t know”. When we
I am afraid I don’t really understand that. How does moving the spine content
to another module help? Doesn’t that mean users would now need
log4j-api-2.x.jar and log4j-spi-3,x,jar? What is the benefit of that?
Ralph
> On Jan 17, 2024, at 12:09 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> That might work, yea
The quick answer to this question is “I don’t know”. When we first started on
the 3.x adventure I can assure you that log4j-api was very different in the 3.x
branch because of the changes we needed to make for JPMS and to the build.
However, since we have since carried those changes back to 2.x
That might work, yeah.
> On Jan 17, 2024, at 12:46 PM, Volkan Yazıcı wrote:
>
> We can move the spi package content in main to a separate module in main.
> SPI problem is solved?
>
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 at 18:33, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
>> I suspect this won’t work that well once I’ve implemente
We can move the spi package content in main to a separate module in main.
SPI problem is solved?
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 at 18:33, Matt Sicker wrote:
> I suspect this won’t work that well once I’ve implemented
> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/issues/1977 as the current
> provider SPI is fa
Or if we back port any of those changes I’ll propose, then perhaps we can
continue with the API at 2.x. That does require that the API target Java 8,
though.
> On Jan 17, 2024, at 11:32 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> I suspect this won’t work that well once I’ve implemented
> https://github.com/a
I suspect this won’t work that well once I’ve implemented
https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/issues/1977 as the current provider
SPI is fairly lacking. It might make more sense to release the main API as
3.0.0 and have 2.x depend on the updated API.
> On Jan 17, 2024, at 10:11 AM, Volkan
Given Ralph and Piotr are strongly opinionated about keeping
`log4j-api-3.x` binary compatible to `log4j-api-2.x`, can we not release
`log4j-api-3.x` in `main` and make `main` only depend on `log4j-api-2.x`
instead? (We can move the contents of the `spi` package in `log4j-api-3.x`
to a separate `lo
