We currently have logging-log4j-tools which contains the log server code. The
log4j server isn’t really a tool so I would propose that the repo either be
renamed to logging-log4j-samples or logging-log4j-server. The pros and cons are:
logging-log4j-samples:
Pros:
1. Other sample code currently in the log4j2 repo could move here.
Cons:
1. If we ever want to release log4j-server it would be hard to do from
a samples repo. However, we could create the logging-log4j-server repo at that
time and then move the code there.
logging-log4j-server:
Pros:
1. Lets us do whatever we want with the server code.
Cons:
1. Doesn’t do anything to allow other sample code to be moved from the
log4j2 repo.
Another option is to do both.
Note - I am also proposing that the changes utility code that Volkan is
creating be moved into logging-log4j-tools as it really doesn’t belong in
log4j2 itself and can be used by both 2.x and 3.x. If we do this then the
utility classes can be independently maintained and released.
My preference would be to clone logging-log4j-tools to logging-log4j-server and
then delete what is currently in the log4j-tools repo.
Thoughts?
Ralph
