Fwd: [jira] [Resolved] (INFRA-14645) node requirements for jenkins job logging-log4net

2017-08-28 Thread Dominik Psenner
Hi, Chris just resolved our infra ticket regarding .net frameworks on the windows nodes. This is a summary of the outcome: > Chris Thistlethwaite resolved INFRA-14645. > -- >Resolution: Fixed >> 1. We have observed that none of the windows nodes appear

Jenkins build is back to normal : Log4j 2.x #3037

2017-08-28 Thread Apache Jenkins Server
See

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Mikael Ståldal
Testing with: Apache Maven 3.3.9 (bb52d8502b132ec0a5a3f4c09453c07478323dc5; 2015-11-10T17:41:47+01:00) Maven home: /opt/apache-maven-3.3.9 Java version: 1.8.0_144, vendor: Oracle Corporation Java home: /opt/jvm/jdk1.8.0_144/jre Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: UTF-8 OS name: "linux", ve

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Matt Sicker
On 28 August 2017 at 14:27, Mikael Ståldal wrote: > Oops, fixed in master branch now. > > I changed pom.xml and doap_log4j2.rdf, is that all? That's all the places I know of. Thanks! > > > > On 2017-08-28 17:51, Matt Sicker wrote: > >> * Mikael still works for Magine TV on the team page; he s

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Mikael Ståldal
Oops, fixed in master branch now. I changed pom.xml and doap_log4j2.rdf, is that all? On 2017-08-28 17:51, Matt Sicker wrote: * Mikael still works for Magine TV on the team page; he should update his organization. ;)

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Gary Gregory
Do note that you cannot build with Docker from a src zip file. Gary On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > +1 > > Builds fine with Java 8 and 9 (tried originally with Zulu 8u144 and JDK 9 > EA +181) on macOS 10.12. Also builds fine in Docker. > > Signatures are all good. > > Mave

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Gary Gregory
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > Thanks Matt. I agree that we should stick with 2.x.x from here on out. > Whoever modified the version in changes.xml set it to 2.9.0 so I just > followed suit. > That would be me ;-) Gary > > Ralph > > > On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Matt

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Ralph Goers
Oh, and if you check out from the release tag and create a branch the web site fixes can be made there after the release is complete. Ralph > On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > +1 > > Builds fine with Java 8 and 9 (tried originally with Zulu 8u144 and JDK 9 > EA +181) on macO

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Ralph Goers
Thanks Matt. I agree that we should stick with 2.x.x from here on out. Whoever modified the version in changes.xml set it to 2.9.0 so I just followed suit. Ralph > On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > +1 > > Builds fine with Java 8 and 9 (tried originally with Zulu 8u144 and J

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Gary Gregory
I should also add this note to my +1: I have been testing SNAPSHOT builds for a couple of weeks waiting on 2.9.0, so I am pretty confident WRT stability. Gary On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > +1 > > Builds fine with Java 8 and 9 (tried originally with Zulu 8u144 and JDK 9 >

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Matt Sicker
+1 Builds fine with Java 8 and 9 (tried originally with Zulu 8u144 and JDK 9 EA +181) on macOS 10.12. Also builds fine in Docker. Signatures are all good. Maven artifacts work with my tested applications (which are Scala 2.12 applications using SBT 0.13.16 with log4j-api-scala 11.0 as well). No

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Matt Sicker
I do like the full version number, but I'm just comparing to historical releases: https://search.maven.org/#search%7Cgav%7C1%7Cg%3A%22org.apache.logging.log4j%22%20AND%20a%3A%22log4j-api%22 On 28 August 2017 at 10:17, Gary Gregory wrote: > It sorts pertier? > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:15 AM,

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Gary Gregory
It sorts pertier? On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > Any particular reason this is tagged as 2.9.0 instead of 2.9? > > On 27 August 2017 at 19:03, Matt Sicker wrote: > > > > > > > On 27 August 2017 at 11:23, Ralph Goers > > wrote: > > > >> Matt added an exclude for the docke

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.9.0-rc1

2017-08-28 Thread Matt Sicker
Any particular reason this is tagged as 2.9.0 instead of 2.9? On 27 August 2017 at 19:03, Matt Sicker wrote: > > > On 27 August 2017 at 11:23, Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> Matt added an exclude for the docker file back before the 2.8. release. >> I’m not sure why. >> > > I don't remember exactly w