Re: Removal of log4j-layout-jackson-* modules

2020-06-15 Thread Ralph Goers
Is it possible to modify those Layouts to use yours instead? I’d prefer not to break existing applications. Ralph > On Jun 15, 2020, at 11:36 AM, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > > Hello, > > I want to go forward and delete log4j-layout-jackson-* modules from > the master. This will effectively remove

Re: Merging JsonTemplateLayout to release-2.x branch

2020-06-15 Thread Ralph Goers
I have no objection, but I still need to validate the changes you have made in “Logging in the Cloud” against the way it was previously. Ralph > On Jun 15, 2020, at 11:26 AM, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > > Hello, > > May I cherry-pick the JsonTemplateLayout-related changes to > release-2.x branch?

Re: Removal of log4j-layout-jackson-* modules

2020-06-15 Thread Carter Kozak
Configuration breaks have always been painful for consumers for a couple reasons. We don't have a great way to tell whether an appender is still being used, and it's not clear to consumers when they upgrade libraries that their configuration may no longer work. This becomes more confusing when a

Re: Removal of log4j-layout-jackson-* modules

2020-06-15 Thread Matt Sicker
The master branch is still the release-3.x branch. I don't think we'll need an explicit branch around that for a while (master would have to be v4 or something). On Mon, 15 Jun 2020 at 13:36, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > > Hello, > > I want to go forward and delete log4j-layout-jackson-* modules from >

Removal of log4j-layout-jackson-* modules

2020-06-15 Thread Volkan Yazıcı
Hello, I want to go forward and delete log4j-layout-jackson-* modules from the master. This will effectively remove JsonLayout, XmlLayout, and YamlLayout. Given these changes break backward compatibility, shall I introduce these changes to a new release-3.x branch? Maybe this is a good moment to d

Merging JsonTemplateLayout to release-2.x branch

2020-06-15 Thread Volkan Yazıcı
Hello, May I cherry-pick the JsonTemplateLayout-related changes to release-2.x branch? Are there any objections regarding its current form and changes it incorporates? Kind regards.