Re: 2.5 release

I remember making a pom property to specify the signing key used for a release, so that won't be hard. Hopefully the git problem will be resolved by then, but I'll keep that in mind if it's not. On 23 November 2015 at 16:01, Ralph Goers wrote: > Also, the process is going to have to change sligh

Re: 2.5 release

Also, the process is going to have to change slightly. Due to restrictions on git right now we will have to specify a tag of 2.5-rc1 instead of 2.5. This is because tags can’t be deleted. I believe you can do that by specifying -Dtag=release-2.5-rc1. Ralph > On Nov 23, 2015, at 2:58 PM, Ralph

Re: 2.5 release

I’m fine with that Matt. Just make sure the web site is updated with your key. Actually, it should probably be updated to reflect the key that was used to sign each release, not just the current one. I wish the ASF had a code signing key or we had one for the Logging PMC, but we don’t. Ralph

Re: 2.5 release

Sounds like Matt is back in full force! :-) Gary On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > I'd be willing to be the RM again if you'd like. > > On 23 November 2015 at 11:28, Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> I think we are getting near time to release 2.5. There are a couple of >> issues

Re: 2.5 release

I'd be willing to be the RM again if you'd like. On 23 November 2015 at 11:28, Ralph Goers wrote: > I think we are getting near time to release 2.5. There are a couple of > issues I still want to look into. In addition, I’d appreciate any extra > testing as there are a few new features and chan

2.5 release

I think we are getting near time to release 2.5. There are a couple of issues I still want to look into. In addition, I’d appreciate any extra testing as there are a few new features and changes in this release - namely, the items I added include modifying the configuration change detection mec

Re: Commit stats

I looked at the git summary output from git-extras and it is close to what github now says for me. Ralph > On Nov 23, 2015, at 8:28 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > No idea, But that is a lot better than the 38 commits it said I did last > night. > > Ralph > >> On Nov 23, 2015, at 8:03 AM, Paul B

Re: Commit stats

No idea, But that is a lot better than the 38 commits it said I did last night. Ralph > On Nov 23, 2015, at 8:03 AM, Paul Benedict wrote: > > Ralph, it says "rgoers" did 809 commits. Is that still too low? > > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Ralph Goers

Java deserialization security issue

Can Log4j have a problem here? Something to keep in mind. http://www.darkreading.com/informationweek-home/why-the-java-deserialization-bug-is-a-big-deal/d/d-id/1323237 -- [image: MagineTV] *Mikael Ståldal* Senior software developer *Magine TV* mikael.stal...@magine.com Grev Turegatan 3 | 114

Re: Commit stats

Ralph, it says "rgoers" did 809 commits. Is that still too low? Cheers, Paul On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > I am looking at > https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/graphs/contributors?from=2010-05-09&to=2015-11-22&type=c. > Can someone explain to me why it thinks I h

Re: Commit stats

When I run "git summary" (from git-extras) on the repo, it looks like all of GitHub's statistics are way off. Gary should have over 2000 commits for instance. On 23 November 2015 at 01:42, Ralph Goers wrote: > My emails weren’t registered properly. They rebuilt the cache and it looks > a bit bet

[jira] [Commented] (LOG4J2-435) Feature request: auto-delete older log files

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15022112#comment-15022112 ] Gary Gregory commented on LOG4J2-435: - Would it be simpler to rollover to a log4j "own

[jira] [Commented] (LOG4J2-435) Feature request: auto-delete older log files

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15021989#comment-15021989 ] Robert Schaft commented on LOG4J2-435: -- Remko, I understand your problem with the da

[jira] [Commented] (LOG4J2-1034) JsonConfiguration.getObjectMapper may more friendly to json

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1034?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15021771#comment-15021771 ] Mikael Ståldal commented on LOG4J2-1034: Perhaps we should have a look at [HOCON

Re: Deleting branch LOG4J2-89

I agree that it is annoying with many old branches around. On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > They actually do get annoying when you are trying to switch branches in > IntelliJ. You have to select from a list. Right now we only have about 20 > so it isn’t a huge issue. > > Ral