Re: Syncing `master`

Suggestion: Shall we harness GitHub Actions to create a GitHub Issue telling commit X needs to be reflected on branch Y whenever a commit lands on branch Z? If you all agree, I volunteer to set this up. On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 9:48 AM Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: > Hi all, > > As you know `master` i

Re: Log4j Maven plugin

Great job, Piotr! 👏 Agreed with the separate repository idea. I suggest moving it to the `logging-log4j-maven-plugins` repository – you need an INFRA ticket to create the repository. If we go that route, I strongly suggest incorporating following goodies from the `logging-log4j-tools` repository:

Re: Log4j Maven plugin

The groupId will almost always be “org.apache.logging.log4j” unless it isn’t specifically for log4j. In that case the last token would be the “category/subproject” it belongs to. As far as where to put it you have a few choices. Any PMC member can create a new repo so the only question is the n

Re: Syncing `master`

That seems impractical as it will result in every commit creating a new issue since it isn’t possible to commit to both branches at once. Ralph > On Jan 2, 2023, at 1:50 AM, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > > Suggestion: Shall we harness GitHub Actions to create a GitHub Issue > telling commit X needs t

Re: [apache/logging-log4j2] Run failed: build - master (8baedd7)

I don’t really understand why this failed. That test hasn’t been modified in quite a while. Ralph > On Jan 2, 2023, at 9:20 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > > > [apache/logging-log4j2] build workflow run > > > > build: Some jobs were not successful > > View workflow run >

Re: [apache/logging-log4j2] Run failed: build - master (8baedd7)

It’s a test that uses the real clock. Perhaps it has something to do with the new year? — Matt Sicker > On Jan 2, 2023, at 11:25, Ralph Goers wrote: > > I don’t really understand why this failed. That test hasn’t been modified in > quite a while. > > Ralph > >> On Jan 2, 2023, at 9:20 AM, Ra

Re: Log4j Maven plugin

Link to the self-service page: https://selfserve.apache.org/ — Matt Sicker > On Jan 2, 2023, at 09:31, Ralph Goers wrote: > > The groupId will almost always be “org.apache.logging.log4j” unless it isn’t > specifically for log4j. In that case the last token would be the > “category/subproject”

Re: [log4cxx] Next steps / release?

Update: FTP masters have been very quick and approved the package, so the snapshot is already in experimental. [1] I've also rebuilt all reverse depdencies successfully and asked the release team to approve the transition. [2] [1] https://packages.debian.org/source/experimental/log4cxx [2] https

Re: Log4j Maven plugin

Hi, On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 at 10:08, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > Agreed with the separate repository idea. I suggest moving it to the > `logging-log4j-maven-plugins` repository – you need an INFRA ticket to > create the repository. The Maven plugin will not be the only use-case of the code after I finish

Re: Syncing `master`

Hi Volkan, On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 at 09:50, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > Suggestion: Shall we harness GitHub Actions to create a GitHub Issue > telling commit X needs to be reflected on branch Y whenever a commit lands > on branch Z? > > If you all agree, I volunteer to set this up. If you can add a time

Re: Log4j Maven plugin

I think putting it in the tools repo would be fine. Ralph > On Jan 2, 2023, at 2:34 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: > > Hi, > >> On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 at 10:08, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: >> Agreed with the separate repository idea. I suggest moving it to the >> `logging-log4j-maven-plugins` repository –

Re: [log4cxx] Next steps / release?

Awesome! Thanks for the packaging work that you do. Once we get it voted on you should have a proper release. -Robert Middleton On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 2:52 PM Tobias Frost wrote: > > Update: > > FTP masters have been very quick and approved the package, so the snapshot is > already in experime

Re: [VOTE] Release log4cxx 1.0.0

Guten Tag Robert Middleton, am Sonntag, 1. Januar 2023 um 19:06 schrieben Sie: > Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list. > [] +1, release the artifacts > [] -1, don't release because... +1 I've successfully compiled and ran all tests using MS Visual Studio 17.4.3