Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-08 Thread Ralph Goers
My +1 Ralph > On Jun 5, 2016, at 6:55 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > This is a vote to release Log4j 2.6.1, the next version of the Log4j 2 > project. > > Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. > [] +1, release the artifacts > [] -1, don't release because... > >

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-07 Thread Gary Gregory
- Testing distribution src zip: MD5, SHA1, ASC OK. - RAT check OK. - mvn clirr:check -pl log4j-api Clirr check errors MUST be explained somewhere, at least in the RELEASE-NOTES file. [ERROR] 7005: org.apache.logging.log4j.message.AbstractMessageFactory: Parameter 2 of 'public org.apache.logging

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-06 Thread Gary Gregory
I am building 'mvn clean test' on Windows and this test has been 'hung' for a while now: org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.AsyncAppenderQueueFullPolicyTest Apache Maven 3.3.9 (bb52d8502b132ec0a5a3f4c09453c07478323dc5; 2015-11-10T08:41:47-08:00) Maven home: E:\Java\apache-maven-3.3.9\bin\.. J

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-06 Thread Matt Sicker
Alright, I've removed the deprecated methods from Throwables. On 6 June 2016 at 19:16, Gary Gregory wrote: > I'm OK with dropping those in master, not great for BC but acceptable > since we make no BC guarantees on Core. > > Gary > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > >> Just

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-06 Thread Gary Gregory
I'm OK with dropping those in master, not great for BC but acceptable since we make no BC guarantees on Core. Gary On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > Just noticed in some javadocs: Throwables.addSuppressed() was marked > deprecated for removal in 2.5 and yet here it stands in

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-06 Thread Matt Sicker
Just noticed in some javadocs: Throwables.addSuppressed() was marked deprecated for removal in 2.5 and yet here it stands in 2.6.x. Should be really removed eventually. On 6 June 2016 at 17:12, Leon Finker wrote: > +1 > we've hit LOG4J2-1409 issue > > On 2016-06-05 21:55 (-0400), Ralph Goers >

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-06 Thread Leon Finker
+1 we've hit LOG4J2-1409 issue On 2016-06-05 21:55 (-0400), Ralph Goers wrote: > This is a vote to release Log4j 2.6.1, the next version of the Log4j 2 > project. > > Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. > [] +1, release the artifacts > [] -1, don't release

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-06 Thread Matt Sicker
+1 to release On 6 June 2016 at 13:47, Ralph Goers wrote: > Sorry, I usually cut and paste the prior release email. That link was for > the prior release. Just change the 17 to 19 in the browser. > > Ralph > > On Jun 6, 2016, at 11:43 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Just FYI, the artifacts link is h

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-06 Thread Ralph Goers
Sorry, I usually cut and paste the prior release email. That link was for the prior release. Just change the 17 to 19 in the browser. Ralph > On Jun 6, 2016, at 11:43 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Just FYI, the artifacts link is hyperlinked wrong. You have to copy/paste the > link. Not sure how

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-06 Thread Matt Sicker
Just FYI, the artifacts link is hyperlinked wrong. You have to copy/paste the link. Not sure how that happened. On 6 June 2016 at 08:09, Remko Popma wrote: > +1 > Remko > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> This is a vote to release Log4j 2.6.1, the next version of the

Re: [VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-06 Thread Remko Popma
+1 Remko On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > This is a vote to release Log4j 2.6.1, the next version of the Log4j 2 > project. > > Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. > [] +1, release the artifacts > [] -1, don't release because... > > The v

[VOTE] Log4j 2.6.1 rc1

2016-06-05 Thread Ralph Goers
This is a vote to release Log4j 2.6.1, the next version of the Log4j 2 project. Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. [] +1, release the artifacts [] -1, don't release because... The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or more if required). All votes are welcom