This would be a good one to discuss and flush out in a conference call.
Gary
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022, 13:32 Matt Sicker wrote:
> We've had some conversations about this off and on, though I don't
> think we've had any formal decision or discussion on it. For Log4j
> 3.x, we'd like to make it so th
Actually, I was planning on working on converting the JSON configuration to
use JsonReader as soon as we get 2.17.2 released. There are just so many
things worth fixing for this one that it is taking longer than I had hoped.
I will also be fixing the other things that require modules other than
We've had some conversations about this off and on, though I don't
think we've had any formal decision or discussion on it. For Log4j
3.x, we'd like to make it so that log4j-api, log4j-plugins, and
log4j-core only require the java.base module with optional
dependencies allowed for certain plumbing
