On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 9:54 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> I didn’t realize that java.base was that limited. Are these all required > at run time or only build? For example, the annotation processor is not > used when log4j is running so I would suspect it is required to be present > in the build and I would think it would have to be present when the > compiler is running. > > Where are we using JNDI? > > While scripting support certainly could be optional, it would probably > uglify the code to do that. > > I have mixed feelings about whether it makes sense for JMX to be optional > or not. > > I really can’t see how the xml could be optional. > Based on https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/configuration.html#Properties, isn't XML optional? I can I configure everything with Properties? Gary > > Whatever we decide, it will need to be documented. > > Ralph > > > > > On Jan 28, 2018, at 9:35 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > That's rather limiting. Here's what we're already using: > > > > * java.compiler: annotation processing (could potentially be split, but > > this situation is already confusing enough for users) > > * java.management: JMX > > * java.naming: JNDI > > * java.scripting: javascript/groovy/etc plugins > > * java.xml: XML configuration parsing > > > > I may have missed some others, but it may be difficult to trim it down to > > just java.base. Even with some of the simpler ones, we'll end up with > > several additional modules to detangle that. > > > > If we could include multiple logical modules in a single physical module, > > then this wouldn't be as tedious. > > > > On 27 January 2018 at 20:01, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > wrote: > > > >> Also, in Java 9 it must only require the java.base module. > >> > >> Ralph > >> > >>> On Jan 27, 2018, at 6:49 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> On 27 January 2018 at 16:18, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> The requirement is that log4j-core have no required dependencies. I > >> should > >>>> have as few optional dependencies as possible. > >>>> > >>> > >>> That sounds perfectly reasonable. LMAX and Jackson are good examples. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > > >
