They _can_ be included as binaries, though they require calling out.
I've generally been under the impression that dependencies on cat B or
X need to generally be optional. Though the security issues with v1
are a larger concern, agreed.

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 10:46 AM Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I’m not sure I understand your concern. Category B licensed works can be 
> included as binaries.
>
> However, I expressed a concern on this Jira issue about projects that believe 
> they are OK using reload4j since we are still getting security vulnerability 
> reports for Log4j 1.
>
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Feb 9, 2022, at 6:54 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > I’m not sure how any PMCs are getting away with distributing Logback as 
> > it’s under class B licenses. More info: 
> > https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b
> >
> > —
> > Matt Sicker
> >
> >> On Feb 9, 2022, at 14:16, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> FYI
> >>
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >> From: Chris Nauroth (Jira) <[email protected]>
> >> Date: Wed, Feb 9, 2022, 14:11
> >> Subject: [jira] [Resolved] (ZOOKEEPER-2342) Migrate to Log4J 2.
> >> To: <[email protected]>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>    [
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2342?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
> >> ]
> >>
> >> Chris Nauroth resolved ZOOKEEPER-2342.
> >> --------------------------------------
> >>   Resolution: Won't Do
> >>
> >> ZOOKEEPER-4427 has been committed to migrate to Logback in a new major
> >> version (with the option to swap out the SLF4J back-end if users prefer
> >> Log4J 2). For prior version lines, discussion is under way on the dev
> >> mailing list considering reload4j and the new bridge released by Apache
> >> Logging.
> >>
> >> I'm going to close out this issue, because there is no longer community
> >> interest in the earlier Log4J 2 migration work from a few years ago. Thank
> >> you to everyone who participated on this issue.
> >>
> >>> Migrate to Log4J 2.
> >>> -------------------
> >>>
> >>>               Key: ZOOKEEPER-2342
> >>>               URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2342
> >>>           Project: ZooKeeper
> >>>        Issue Type: Bug
> >>>          Reporter: Chris Nauroth
> >>>          Assignee: Chris Nauroth
> >>>          Priority: Major
> >>>       Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-2342.001.patch
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ZOOKEEPER-1371 removed our source code dependency on Log4J.  It appears
> >> that this also removed the Log4J SLF4J binding jar from the runtime
> >> classpath.  Without any SLF4J binding jar available on the runtime
> >> classpath, it is impossible to write logs.
> >>> This JIRA investigated migration to Log4J 2 as a possible path towards
> >> resolving the bug introduced by ZOOKEEPER-1371.  At this point, we know
> >> this is not feasible short-term.  This JIRA remains open to track long-term
> >> migration to Log4J 2.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
> >> (v8.20.1#820001)
>

Reply via email to