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

Reply via email to