By the way, if you were suggesting to rename the branch to release-3.x for
symmetry or anything, that’d be fine. I mostly meant we don’t need a third
main branch.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 04:20 Volkan Yazıcı wrote:
> Not really, since
>
> 1. I cannot do anything for YAML and XML layouts, obviousl
Not really, since
1. I cannot do anything for YAML and XML layouts, obviously.
2. JsonLayout can leverage JsonTemplateLayout with the
exception of stack traces, since Jackson serializes `Throwable`s
"as is" with nested `StackTraceElement`s, which is, IMHO,
pretty unconventional and I pre
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
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
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
>
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
