rgoers commented on PR #3228: URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/3228#issuecomment-2503565593
Yes, I am aware of all these arguments as they were raised when the dependency was first added. I made the same objection then but was assured that by using provided scope users would have no problems if the dependency is missing. If that really isn’t the case then the dependency should be removed and a different solution should be found. Note that even using Jakarta.annotations would be a problem as we also have a policy to limit the dependencies to Java.base in JPMS, which is work I believe you worked on as part of 3.0. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
