Given the modularity of 3.x, as long as we provide both the jakarta and javax versions of each, I think we'll be ok. We can revisit removal of javax variants in the future if they become a burden on maintenance (e.g., incompatible with newer versions of Java).
On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 12:08 PM Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > While we need to support jakarta I am not sure it is time to drop javax. Our > history > is to support things until the active user base is very low. Last I heard > javax usage > was still larger than jakarta. > > Ralph > > > On Apr 1, 2022, at 9:24 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On the javax->jakarta idea, I think that's a good idea. Every plugin > > we have that uses a javax API should have a jakarta equivalent created > > and promoted over the old version. We have several of them already; > > I'm not sure which ones remain. > > > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 6:22 AM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Yes, thank you Piotr, it's tremendously helpful :-) > >> > >> Gary > >> > >> On Fri, Apr 1, 2022, 03:28 Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Thank you for that! > >>> > >>> Ralph > >>> > >>>> On Mar 31, 2022, at 12:53 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz <piotr.karw...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hello, > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 22:02, Piotr P. Karwasz <piotr.karw...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>>> The `log4j-1.2-api` code seems synchronized between `master` and > >>>>> `release-2.x` up to January 20th. Since part of the desynchronization > >>>>> that occurred afterwards is my fault and some of my changes are built > >>>>> on top of Gary's, I can take care of the cherry-picking. Probably a > >>>>> comparison of the two codes will be necessary at the end. > >>>> > >>>> This is done: the Log4j 1.2 bridge in `master` is up-to-date with > >>>> `release-2.x`. I hit a couple of bumps in the road, while merging the > >>>> commits, but thanks to Matt everything should be Ok now. > >>>> > >>>> Piotr > >>> > >>> >
