Yes. It certainly looks like it (on my phone now).
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 14:53 GitBox wrote:
>
> ichux commented on a change in pull request #607:
> URL:
> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/607#discussion_r770242666
>
>
>
> ##
> File path: src/site/xdoc/manual/layouts.xml.v
I thought there was an agreement on releasing 1.2.18 as "networkless"
release.
I think moving to Git (which is a no-op basically), would greatly simplify
that.
>1.x has been EOL since 2015
There's a demand for fixing CVEs in 1.x
>with possible confusion as to which version
>1.x vs 2.x to use in
-1
1.x has been EOL since 2015, this would only encourage full resurrection,
and inevitable feature creep, with possible confusion as to which version
1.x vs 2.x to use in which circumstance.
Gary
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 23:50 Vladimir Sitnikov
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I suggest log4j 1.x moves from SVN
Hi,
I suggest log4j 1.x moves from SVN to Git.
I do not expect to have great development, however, moving to Git would make
it easier to contribute and review changes.
[ ] +1 let's move to Git and make SVN read-only
[ ] -1 don't do that because ...
Here's my vote: +1
Vladimir
Darn it - forgot to include the very small set of changes I had to make to
pom.xml to get it to build. That's here:
https://github.com/mergebase/log4j/commit/22548a879d786c486d4d37e8ea587a1396a43800
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 2:56 PM Julius Davies
wrote:
> Hi Logging Team!
>
> Long time lurker her
Hi Logging Team!
Long time lurker here. I recently had to build something on Java 6 so
thought I'd take a stab at building Log4J 1.2.17.
Using Maven-3.2.5 with Java 8 I first ran the following commands
01. mvn clean
02. mvn dependency:tree
03. mvn install
04. mvn javadoc:javadoc
05. mvn source:
I don't have any experience modifying (or really using) log4j v1, but
I think we can at least review changes and help validate a release
(along with any PMC-specific release steps to enable your efforts to
eventually get published as an official release). Having release notes
for this version to in
Ok, thanks for the pointers!
Yes I'll volunteer to do some of the grunt work, though I hope some others
join in and we'll need code review from logging experts.
I'm not volunteering to maintain log4j 1.x for the next decade, it should
remain EOL...will add a careful message about that.
If enough
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 1:01 PM Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Same as Ralph. Glad to have some help performing an updated release,
> though unless we can get a few interested maintainers to join the
> project to help continue maintenance, it may cause a lot of confusion
> around EOL support. I do think i
Same as Ralph. Glad to have some help performing an updated release,
though unless we can get a few interested maintainers to join the
project to help continue maintenance, it may cause a lot of confusion
around EOL support. I do think it makes sense to try to make a
security release due to the ove
No objections if you are volunteering to do the work. I do have concerns.
Unless a new set of contributors
wants to become part of the logging project and support Log4j 1 we do not want
to give the impression that
it is being supported.
Ralph
> On Dec 15, 2021, at 10:14 AM, Leo Simons wro
OK, in the meantime please update projects.xml to remove the link
On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 16:09, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> There’s a bug in the doap plugin on certain architectures. We’ll have to look
> into this to re-enable the plugin.
>
> —
> Matt Sicker
>
> > On Dec 15, 2021, at 04:35, sebb wro
On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 16:39, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> We build a new instance of our web site for every log4j release. They are all
> there at https://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.xx/index.html where xx is
> the rest of the release number.
>
> It takes about an hour to build the web site usin
Hey folks,
First, thanks for all the hard work on 2.x, especially these last couple of
weeks!
Please take care of yourself and be kind to yourself :)
Obviously 2.x should get full focus from all that can productively
contribute to it.
I do agree with Vladimir about giving 1.x a little attention.
Can the Lookups or No lookups condition be reviewed? Earlier too it used to
not call the results.add. didn't understand the difference.
Thanks.
We build a new instance of our web site for every log4j release. They are all
there at https://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.xx/index.html where xx is the
rest of the release number.
It takes about an hour to build the web site using the maven site plugin. Since
nothing was really changing w
There’s a bug in the doap plugin on certain architectures. We’ll have to look
into this to re-enable the plugin.
—
Matt Sicker
> On Dec 15, 2021, at 04:35, sebb wrote:
>
> FYI
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Projects
> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 02:00
> Subject: Cannot find d
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 9:34 AM sebb wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 14:17, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >
> > It seems to me we should drop:
> > - 2.12.1
>
> BTW, this is referenced from:
>
> https://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.12.2/download.html
> which redirects to
> https://logging.apache.org
On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 14:17, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> It seems to me we should drop:
> - 2.12.1
BTW, this is referenced from:
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.12.2/download.html
which redirects to
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/log4j-2.12.1/download.html
That page anyway needs an urge
It seems to me we should drop:
- 2.12.1
- 2.15.0
?
Gary
Also the section for 2.12.1 should now be removed; presumably no-one
should be using it going forward?
On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 12:30, sebb wrote:
>
> The links for the previous release (2.3) actually point to 2.12.1
>
> They should ideally use sha256 or sha512 and not md5
>
> Sebb
The links for the previous release (2.3) actually point to 2.12.1
They should ideally use sha256 or sha512 and not md5
Sebb
FYI
-- Forwarded message -
From: Projects
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 at 02:00
Subject: Cannot find doap file:
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf
To: Site Development
URL: https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/doap_log4j.rdf
HTTP Error 404: Not Found
Source:
https://
23 matches
Mail list logo
