I am onboard with your thoughts Ralph; replacing 2.x JARs with 3.x rather
than keeping both, sticking to `log4j2.xml`, keeping API compatible with
2.x, etc. Though I also think 3.x constitutes a good opportunity to lose
some extra weight: deprecated or superseded Maven modules. (I know you are
addr
Gary has suggested that Log4j 3.x should be able to break binary compatibility
since it is a new major version and somehow should be able to coexist side by
side with Log4j 2. I am not really sure where he got that idea but I am going
to try to explain why that is not workable.
First, to have b
