Re: [1/2] logging-log4j2 git commit: LOG4J2-2236 Removed unnecessary dependency on jcommander since Log4j uses embedded picocli since 2.9.

2018-01-30 Thread Gary Gregory
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Remko Popma wrote: > > > On Jan 30, 2018, at 23:10, rpo...@apache.org wrote: > > > > Repository: logging-log4j2 > > Updated Branches: > > refs/heads/master b5d4655d3 -> 136dbf5b5 > > > > > > LOG4J2-2236 Removed unnecessary dependency on jcommander since Log4j > u

Re: [1/2] logging-log4j2 git commit: LOG4J2-2236 Removed unnecessary dependency on jcommander since Log4j uses embedded picocli since 2.9.

2018-01-30 Thread Remko Popma
> On Jan 30, 2018, at 23:10, rpo...@apache.org wrote: > > Repository: logging-log4j2 > Updated Branches: > refs/heads/master b5d4655d3 -> 136dbf5b5 > > > LOG4J2-2236 Removed unnecessary dependency on jcommander since Log4j uses > embedded picocli since 2.9. > > (cherry picked from commit 4da

Re: [log4j] The shape of Log4j

2018-01-30 Thread Gary Gregory
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > >> It looks like you can use jdeps for this. >> > > The code to support the packages option is commented out :-( even in > current snapshots: > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=m

Re: [log4j] The shape of Log4j

2018-01-30 Thread Gary Gregory
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > It looks like you can use jdeps for this. > The code to support the packages option is commented out :-( even in current snapshots: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-jdeps-plugin.git;a=blob;f=src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugin/j

Re: [log4j] The shape of Log4j

2018-01-30 Thread Matt Sicker
It looks like you can use jdeps for this. On 29 January 2018 at 16:11, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 2:39 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > > On 29 January 2018 at 13:10, Gary Gregory > wrote: > > > > > > Speaking of java.sql (and javax.sql): How can we get the Maven build to > > > FA

Re: [log4j] clarify "internal" vs exported packages in core - plugin API

2018-01-30 Thread Gary Gregory
On Jan 30, 2018 11:11, "Ralph Goers" wrote: That is all true, but that doesn’t require creating a new 3.0 branch. Or maybe I misunderstood what you meant by your use of “label". Yes, master should be targeted at 3.0. Yes, the pom.xml files should reflect that. It may be a bit before we agree on w

Re: [log4j] clarify "internal" vs exported packages in core - plugin API

2018-01-30 Thread Ralph Goers
That is all true, but that doesn’t require creating a new 3.0 branch. Or maybe I misunderstood what you meant by your use of “label". Yes, master should be targeted at 3.0. Yes, the pom.xml files should reflect that. It may be a bit before we agree on what all that should be, but all work on mas

Re: [log4j] clarify "internal" vs exported packages in core - plugin API

2018-01-30 Thread Gary Gregory
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:15 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > Why? > We have a new branch for 2.11.0, it will/should build in Jenkins so it will populate the SNAPSHOT repository. Therefore, master needs a NEW SNAPSHOT version. I felt there was consensus on this ML that the reason we created the 2.x-rele

Re: [log4j] clarify "internal" vs exported packages in core - plugin API

2018-01-30 Thread Ralph Goers
Why? Ralph > On Jan 30, 2018, at 8:15 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Should we label master 3.0? > > Gary > > On Jan 30, 2018 07:22, "Remko Popma" wrote: > >> I created branch "release-2.x". >> >> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:45 PM, Apache >> wrote: >> >>> That spot looks ok to me. Please make

Re: [log4j] Jenkins info

2018-01-30 Thread Gary Gregory
I added a Jenkins branch to build for 2.x-release. Gary On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > Those filters were put in place a while back to prevent certain > experimental Jenkins hosts from being used. Labels were given by Infra > after asking about weird build failures in the

Re: [log4j] clarify "internal" vs exported packages in core - plugin API

2018-01-30 Thread Gary Gregory
Should we label master 3.0? Gary On Jan 30, 2018 07:22, "Remko Popma" wrote: > I created branch "release-2.x". > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:45 PM, Apache > wrote: > > > That spot looks ok to me. Please make the branch > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > > > On Jan 29, 2018, at 10:43 PM, Remko Pop

Re: logging-log4j2 git commit: LOG4J2-2236 Removed unnecessary dependency on jcommander since Log4j uses embedded picocli since 2.9.

2018-01-30 Thread Gary Gregory
Will you port to master? Gary On Jan 30, 2018 07:03, wrote: > Repository: logging-log4j2 > Updated Branches: > refs/heads/release-2.x 21bc3aa3b -> 4da4243f5 > > > LOG4J2-2236 Removed unnecessary dependency on jcommander since Log4j uses > embedded picocli since 2.9. > > > Project: http://git-

Re: [logging-log4j2] Git Push Summary

2018-01-30 Thread Remko Popma
And we should update changes.xml in master. On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 10:56 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > We need another Jenkins build for this. We should also change the POM > version in git master to avoid mixing things up. > > Gary > -- Forwarded message -- > From: > Date: Jan 30,

Re: [log4j] clarify "internal" vs exported packages in core - plugin API

2018-01-30 Thread Remko Popma
I created branch "release-2.x". On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:45 PM, Apache wrote: > That spot looks ok to me. Please make the branch > > Sent from my iPad > > > On Jan 29, 2018, at 10:43 PM, Remko Popma wrote: > > > > If you want I can create a “release-2.11” or “release-2.x” branch from > that co

Fwd: [logging-log4j2] Git Push Summary

2018-01-30 Thread Gary Gregory
We need another Jenkins build for this. We should also change the POM version in git master to avoid mixing things up. Gary -- Forwarded message -- From: Date: Jan 30, 2018 06:51 Subject: [logging-log4j2] Git Push Summary To: Cc: Repository: logging-log4j2 > Updated Branches: >

Re: [log4j] clarify "internal" vs exported packages in core - plugin API

2018-01-30 Thread Apache
That spot looks ok to me. Please make the branch Sent from my iPad > On Jan 29, 2018, at 10:43 PM, Remko Popma wrote: > > If you want I can create a “release-2.11” or “release-2.x” branch from that > commit. > > > >> On Jan 30, 2018, at 14:17, Remko Popma wrote: >> >> I think it’s possib