Cute :-) But... Over at Apache Commons, we just dropped all trunk branches
a long time ago. No renames, it's simpler IMO.
Gary
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 9:57 AM Ralph Goers
wrote:
> I am planning on creating a branch off the 1.2.17 tag. That branch will be
> named main.
> I will make that the
I am planning on creating a branch off the 1.2.17 tag. That branch will be
named main.
I will make that the default branch. Then I plan to rename trunk to a nice name
like
DEAD-HEAD (GRATEFUL)
Ralph
> On Dec 23, 2021, at 7:20 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> A name like "version" should only be
A name like "version" should only be for tags. Once a version is released,
it does not make sense to have a branch by that name, but it would be OK to
have a name for a "maintenance line", as we did with "2.12.x", so here we
would have "1.2.x" which is lame IMO because we're ONLY EVER going to
WAIT, what? That does not make sense, it's the same bad name we ended up in
with the "2.12" branch instead of "2.12.x".
Gary
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 8:50 AM Apache wrote:
> I was already asked to create a branch off of 1.2.17. It will become the
> main branch so trunk can be left alone.
>
>
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 8:43 AM Carter Kozak wrote:
> I’d rather use a name like ‘main’ or ‘develop’ for inclusivity (across all
> our projects).
>
We use 'develop' and 'master' w/i the same repos at work so that would not
help my brain :-) but I am OK changing the name to something else than
I have VMWare on my Mac with both Ubuntu and Windows 10. So I should be able to
run a build.
Ralph
> On Dec 23, 2021, at 5:59 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021, at 13:33, Vladimir Sitnikov wrote:
>>> using maven toolchain feature
>>
>> Are toolchains really
I was already asked to create a branch off of 1.2.17. It will become the main
branch so trunk can be left alone.
Ralph
> On Dec 23, 2021, at 6:41 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> If we use this repo, is everyone OK renaming "trunk" to "master" in order
> to match the branch name of our other
I’d rather use a name like ‘main’ or ‘develop’ for inclusivity (across all our
projects).
-ck
> On Dec 23, 2021, at 08:41, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> If we use this repo, is everyone OK renaming "trunk" to "master" in order
> to match the branch name of our other repos?
>
> Gary
>
>> On Thu,
If we use this repo, is everyone OK renaming "trunk" to "master" in order
to match the branch name of our other repos?
Gary
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 1:34 AM Ralph Goers
wrote:
> I have cloned the read-only log4j repo to
> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j1.
>
> I have followed the build
Hey,
I am interested in legacy/vintage core enterprise systems deep inside large
enterprises and governments, where source code changes are out of the
question, that have lit up yellow in security/compliance dashboards due to
the old CVE against log4j 1.2 for years, that now light up as orange
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021, at 13:33, Vladimir Sitnikov wrote:
>>using maven toolchain feature
>
> Are toolchains really needed, especially, 1.6 and 1.7?
> I believe Java "target=1.4" + Java 1.8 would be good enough.
> If there are javadoc "warnings or errors", we could just suppress it.
> At the
Vladimir,
I appreciate your energy and your enthusiasm, I do, but you're going to
have to pick your battles IMO.
I would say we (not but really wearing my PMC hat) have passively agreed
that we can move toward fixing CVEs and potential CVEs in what would be a
1.2.18.
For us to get there and
>using maven toolchain feature
Are toolchains really needed, especially, 1.6 and 1.7?
I believe Java "target=1.4" + Java 1.8 would be good enough.
If there are javadoc "warnings or errors", we could just suppress it.
At the end of the day, making the build 100 times harder by requesting Java
1.6
Hmm my best guess still is the javadoc warning>error. I didn’t think that
started with JDK 8…
The PR I had made for trunk has this fix for it
https://github.com/apache/log4j/pull/16/commits/490255fbe6a3bc729c09be8ff36b6c965029d67c
For the 1.2.17 PR that commit is not there, probably the broken
>All logging services Git repos start with logging-.
I'm 100% sure INFRA can rename `apache/log4j` into `apache/logging-log4j1`,
and it would be transparent for GitHub users.
GitHub would automatically redirect from apache/log4j to
apache/logging-log4j1
>Of course you are free to screw around
Thanks Leo. I was using Java 8 with maven 3 in a Linux VM. I don’t think maven
3 runs on Java 6.
Ralph
> On Dec 23, 2021, at 5:11 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 12:39, Ralph Goers
> wrote:
>
>> It is still the middle of the night for me so I won’t do anything for
>>
From what I can tell that repo could only be “owned” by a TLP named
log4j.apache.org. It doesn’t show up on the list of gitbox repos owned by any
ASF projects. I believe it is a read-only mirror tied to the sun repo. I asked
infra about it in slack and they weren’t quite sure what it is. So
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 12:39, Ralph Goers
wrote:
> It is still the middle of the night for me so I won’t do anything for
> several hours.
Whoa, best get some rest! :)
I will create the branch but I am curious about the rest. When I ran the
> build last night it ran through a bunch of unit
Well done Ralph, I'll take a look today.
Gary
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 01:34 Ralph Goers wrote:
> I have cloned the read-only log4j repo to
> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j1.
>
> I have followed the build instructions and had to modify the javadoc
> plugin to not fail on errors. Now it
Leo>Instead of or in addition to some of those fixes
I would suggest the following (in case you wonder, I might volunteer to do
ALL of that, so don't assume I just sit and tell others how things should
be done):
1. Use the existing repo https://github.com/apache/log4j instead of a newly
created
Leo,
It is still the middle of the night for me so I won’t do anything for several
hours. I will create the branch but I am curious about the rest. When I ran the
build last night it ran through a bunch of unit tests without any problems. It
then failed due to javadoc errors. I just told the
(On mobile)
Cool.
First I suggest to make a new branch from 1.2.17. Trunk has various stuff
that’s backwards incompatible. Something like
git checkout -b main v1_0_2_17
git push -u main
Then go into GitHub settings and make main the default branch.
So then people make PRs against that.
Think
Ralph, thank you.
Why did you create a new repository?
AFAIK, infra could reopen the old one on request.
Vladimir
https://github.com/apache/log4j was read-only. The new repo is not.
Ralph
> On Dec 22, 2021, at 11:34 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> I have cloned the read-only log4j repo to
> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j1.
>
> I have followed the build instructions and had to modify the javadoc
Do read only mean we cannot give pull request？
Then how can I help you clean the pom correct...
XenoAmess
From: Ralph Goers
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2021 2:34:02 PM
To: dev@logging.apache.org
Subject: New Log4j 1 repo
I have cloned the read-only log4j repo
I have cloned the read-only log4j repo to
https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j1.
I have followed the build instructions and had to modify the javadoc plugin to
not fail on errors. Now it fails in the site plugin.
If someone else wants to take this on I would suggest the first PR should just
26 matches
Mail list logo
