Il 22/05/2014 06:55, Mikolaj Izdebski ha scritto:
On 05/21/2014 08:06 PM, Robert Rati wrote:
So, who needed log4j2? It is massively incompatible with log4j1.2 and
isn't a simple port job. I would argue if log4j2 was actually needed,
it should have been introduced as a separate log4j2 package a
On 05/21/2014 08:06 PM, Robert Rati wrote:
> So, who needed log4j2? It is massively incompatible with log4j1.2 and
> isn't a simple port job. I would argue if log4j2 was actually needed,
> it should have been introduced as a separate log4j2 package and allow
> projects to port to it as they have
- Original Message -
> From: "Robert Rati"
> To: "Aleksandar Kurtakov" , "Development discussions
> related to Fedora"
>
> Cc: "Fedora Big Data SIG" , "Fedora Java
> Development List"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 2
So, who needed log4j2? It is massively incompatible with log4j1.2 and
isn't a simple port job. I would argue if log4j2 was actually needed,
it should have been introduced as a separate log4j2 package and allow
projects to port to it as they have time/need. This update log4j to an
incompatibl
On 21 May 2014 17:03, Robert Rati wrote:
> I've been working on updating the hadoop package to the latest 2.4.0
> release and at this point I've resolved all the issues but I'm now blocked
> by the log4j2 update. log4j2 breaks the hadoop build pretty severely, and
> it doesn't seem the log4j2 te
