Hi all, On Sun, 3 Sept 2023 at 22:37, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > Here is my position on this. > > 1. We don’t change the repo layout for 2.x. It is too late in the game for > that as 2.x should be moving to maintenance mode. > 2. Lpg4j API should be separated - both with its own repo and a separate web > site. > 3. I would separate the rest as: > log4j2 - core, plugins, plugin-processor > log4j-jee - appserver, other JEE modules > log4j-api-bindings - modules that bind the LOG4J API to some other > implementation > log4j-core-bindings - modules that map some other API to Log4j API > and/or Core. > Log4j-jackson-layouts - Layouts that are implemented with Jackson > Other modules grouped as appropriate or as an individual artifact per > repo.
I like this proposition, but I am not confident if we can reach a consensus. Apart from the details can we all agree that `log4j-api` and `log4j-core` should be in separate repos and have separate lifecycles? If you agree conditionally, what conditions should be met? Piotr
