> On Feb 13, 2024, at 3:39 AM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote:
>
> If such a thing is even possible, it would be nice if we can get
> `jakarta.logging` as the package prefix.
Creating a Jakarta logging would certainly be possible. I am not certain if
that follows the JCP process though since Jakart
Hi Gary,
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 at 17:26, Gary Gregory wrote:
> The package would change from org.apache.commons.logging to
> org.apache.commons.logging2.
> The Maven coordinates would change from
> commons-logging:commons-logging to org.apache.commons:commons-logging2
The only case in whic
Hi,
I agree with Piotr, except 3 there is no real point in any change IMHO so
think it is 3 for maintenance only or noop without any downside.
Le dim. 11 févr. 2024 à 00:35, Piotr P. Karwasz a
écrit :
> Hi Gary,
>
> On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 at 17:26, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > My main driver for the n
Hi Gary,
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 at 17:26, Gary Gregory wrote:
> My main driver for the next version is to drop support and dependency
> on the Log4j 1.x JARs file(s). I speak of JAR files here as opposed to
> APIs, see below.
Log4JLogger is disabled by default in version 1.3.0 (cf. [1]) and the
dep
I'm fine with #1 or #2 if you can make either work.
I actively dislike #3. In particular I do not think we should change
package names or Maven coordinates. I think it is OK and in this case
highly advisable to break API compatibility solely by removing support
for obsolete and mostly unused funct
Experiment for (1):
https://github.com/garydgregory/commons-logging/tree/log4j1-log42-api
Yes, I know there are test failures (they make sense, and that needs adjusting).
Gary
On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 11:26 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Hi All:
>
> I want to focus on content before we decide what l
Below.
On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 12:11 PM sebb wrote:
>
> On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 at 16:27, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >
> > Hi All:
> >
> > I want to focus on content before we decide what label to put on the
> > next release. Then, we can see if we want to break binary
> > compatibility (BC) for a Common
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 at 16:27, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Hi All:
>
> I want to focus on content before we decide what label to put on the
> next release. Then, we can see if we want to break binary
> compatibility (BC) for a Commons Logging 2.0.0.
>
> My main driver for the next version is to drop su
Hi All:
I want to focus on content before we decide what label to put on the
next release. Then, we can see if we want to break binary
compatibility (BC) for a Commons Logging 2.0.0.
My main driver for the next version is to drop support and dependency
on the Log4j 1.x JARs file(s). I speak of JA
I'd like to plan and start working on a 2.0 release of commons-logging
with the specific goal of resolving the large number of out of date,
unsupported, old libraries that this project pulls into so many
dependency trees. There's been some discussion of a 2.0 release in
JIra at https://issues.apac
Rainer,
Is there anything on the Log4j 2 side that would make this easier or
better? If so, would you be willing to raise a JIRA with Log4j 2. FYI: I am
on the Apache Logging PMC and have been quite involved in Log4j 2.
Gary
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Rainer Jung
wrote:
>
> Am 01.12.2014
Am 01.12.2014 um 14:31 schrieb Gary Gregory:
FWIW, I think a new version of CL would be 'fun' if it included support for
Log4j 2...
I did an experiment in Tomcat land, because I didn't like the way Log4J
version 2 supported commons-logging. Originally if you want to plug
log4j version 2 into
orks, you are welcome.
>>
>> You need touch them to implement the new logging methods.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Christian
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> For anything more I would point to log4j 2.
>>>>>>
d point to log4j 2.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> Original message From: Christian
>>>>> Grobmeier Date:11/30/2014 16:27
>>>>> (GMT-05:00) To: Commons Developers List
>>>>> Cc: Sub
4j 2.
>> >> >
>> >> > Gary
>> >> >
>> >> > Original message From: Christian
>> >> > Grobmeier Date:11/30/2014 16:27
>> >> > (GMT-05:00) To: Commons Developers List
>> >> &g
inal message From: Christian
> >> > Grobmeier Date:11/30/2014 16:27
> >> > (GMT-05:00) To: Commons Developers List
> >> > Cc: Subject: [logging]
> >> > Commons Logging 2.0?
> >> > Hi folks,
> >> >
> >>
p them?
maybe build a separate module for them
For anything more I would point to log4j 2.
Gary
Original message From: Christian Grobmeier Date:11/30/2014 16:27
(GMT-05:00) To: Commons Developers List Cc: Subject: [logging]
Commons Logging 2.0?
Hi folks,
I am perfectly awar
> > ---- Original message From: Christian
>> > Grobmeier Date:11/30/2014 16:27
>> > (GMT-05:00) To: Commons Developers List
>> > Cc: Subject: [logging]
>> > Commons Logging 2.0?
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > I am perfectly awa
;> debug(Object o, Object... args) {}
> >>
> >> That aside, I would do the following:
> >>
> >> - jdk support for at least >7 (varargs need 5, but MessageFormat 7)
> >> - remove AvalonLogger and LogKitLogger
> >>
> >>
> >&g
gt;
> > >
> > > > For anything more I would point to log4j 2.
> > > >
> > > > Gary
> > > >
> > > > Original message From: Christian
> > Grobmeier Date:11/30/2014 16:27
> > (GMT-05:00) To: Commons Developer
>> Addition:
>> debug(Object o, Object... args) {}
>>
>> That aside, I would do the following:
>>
>> - jdk support for at least >7 (varargs need 5, but MessageFormat 7)
>> - remove AvalonLogger and LogKitLogger
>>
>>
>> >
>> > > For anythi
; >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > > Original message From: Christian
> Grobmeier Date:11/30/2014 16:27
> (GMT-05:00) To: Commons Developers List
> Cc: Subject: [logging] Commons Logging 2.0?
>
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> &
: Christian Grobmeier
> > Date:11/30/2014 16:27 (GMT-05:00)
> > To: Commons Developers List
> > Cc: Subject: [logging] Commons Logging 2.0?
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I am perfectly aware that I was saying CL needs to be deprecated only
&g
Spring dev thought a new
version would be useful.
> For anything more I would point to log4j 2.
>
> Gary
>
> Original message From: Christian Grobmeier
> Date:11/30/2014 16:27 (GMT-05:00)
> To: Commons Developers List
> Cc: Subject: [logging] Commons Lo
: Commons Developers List Cc:
Subject: [logging] Commons Logging 2.0?
Hi folks,
I am perfectly aware that I was saying CL needs to be deprecated only
before month.
Tomcat uses CL and that was more or less the reason it would stay - so I
thought.
Recently I talked to a person actively involved in
Hi folks,
I am perfectly aware that I was saying CL needs to be deprecated only
before month.
Tomcat uses CL and that was more or less the reason it would stay - so I
thought.
Recently I talked to a person actively involved in Spring. He explained,
Spring would use
CL and they are quite happy with
> Anyway, if there are some reasons to continue working I would welcome
> Torstens approach of course! Not that I want to take out the
> enthusiasm here
I am also not sure it's worth the effort TBH.
FWIW: for libraries I ended up usually having no logging dependency at
all and for projects I just
that I want to take out the
enthusiasm here
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> hi guys,
> you have the full support also from my side, a fresh new era of
> commons-components has to born.
> I am +1 to work on a commons-logging-2.0. "It's clobberin&#x
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Hi Ralph!
>
> I took a pretty deep look into log4j-2.0 already (even used it for a few
> sample projects). But I was not aware that it's also an abstraction
> layer/facade ^^
> So by using log4j-2.0 in DeltaSpike, a container vendor could mix
strub
- Original Message -
> From: "ralph.goers @dslextreme.com"
> To: Commons Developers List ; Mark Struberg
>
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2012 8:20 PM
> Subject: Re: any plans for commons-logging-2.0?
>
> You could look at the Log4
hi guys,
you have the full support also from my side, a fresh new era of
commons-components has to born.
I am +1 to work on a commons-logging-2.0. "It's clobberin' time!"
all the best,
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com
ogging, etc
>
> Would there be some interest for creating a commons-logging-2.0?
>
> We could also use this in OpenWebBeans, TomEE, etc
>
>
> We could also do the prototyping in DeltaSpike. There are also a few
> DeltaSpike committers which previously worked on JBoss logging.
&
> Would there be some interest for creating a commons-logging-2.0?
I had some code for CL2 version. Basically commons 1.x but without the
detection logic.
So you pick the implementation by having the right jar in the
classpath. Not sure I still have it.
At some stage I just gave up. Mos
variable-argument
parameters, typesafe logging, etc
Would there be some interest for creating a commons-logging-2.0?
We could also use this in OpenWebBeans, TomEE, etc
We could also do the prototyping in DeltaSpike. There are also a few DeltaSpike
committers which previously worked on JBoss
34 matches
Mail list logo
