I suspect this won’t work that well once I’ve implemented 
https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/issues/1977 as the current provider 
SPI is fairly lacking. It might make more sense to release the main API as 
3.0.0 and have 2.x depend on the updated API.

> On Jan 17, 2024, at 10:11 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote:
> 
> Given Ralph and Piotr are strongly opinionated about keeping
> `log4j-api-3.x` binary compatible to `log4j-api-2.x`, can we not release
> `log4j-api-3.x` in `main` and make `main` only depend on `log4j-api-2.x`
> instead? (We can move the contents of the `spi` package in `log4j-api-3.x`
> to a separate `log4j-spi` module in `main`.) This will make everything
> crystal clear:
> 
>   - Log4j 3 is just a major improvement over the backend
>   - Log4j 3 still supports Log4j 2 API
>   - We can move the Log4j 2 API to a separate repository with its own
>   release life cycle (ala SLF4J)
>   - When time comes to make a new Log4j API where PMC agrees to make
>   breaking changes, we can call that one Log4j 3 API
> 
> I would appreciate it if you can help me to understand if I am
> missing something. Otherwise, I would like to know why we need to make a
> major release for a project that is identical to its previous version.

Reply via email to