I haven’t looked yet but make sure the new module dependencies are added to Log4J-distribution.
Ralph > On Jan 29, 2018, at 6:55 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:38 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I should add that each module must have a unique package hierarchy so, in >>> general, the package names should be org.apache.logging.log4j.modulename. >>> In this case it would be org.apache.logging.log4j.jeromq.apppender. The >>> mom package probably has no value. >>> >> >> I'll change the packages and write the changes in the release notes. >> > > Please review git master for the package name changes and release notes. > > Gary > > >> >> Gary >> >> >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>>> On Jan 28, 2018, at 2:23 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Any component that is not in the core module MUST NOT use the core >>> package. That would make it impossible to package them as Java 9 modules. >>>> >>>> Ralph >>>> >>>>> On Jan 28, 2018, at 11:31 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi All, >>>>> >>>>> Now that the ZeroMQ via JeroMQ support is in its own module >>> log4j-jeromq, I >>>>> wonder if the Java package should change from >>>>> >>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.mom.jeromq >>>>> >>>>> to >>>>> >>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.appender.mom.jeromq >>>>> >>>>> ? >>>>> >>>>> Same for the recently moved JPA appender. >>>>> >>>>> Same for impending move of the Kafka appender. >>>>> >>>>> This would break BC for Core for apps that directly reference these >>>>> classes. As opposed to referencing the appenders from an XML/JSON/YAML >>>>> config file. >>>>> >>>>> Gary >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>
