Leo, Maybe, but maybe not. To be clear, the PMC still has concerns about this. But Ceki has commit rights and obviously has quite a bit of knowledge on Log4j and what was supported.
My personal opinion is that the closer the build can get to producing a release that is 100% compatible with Log4j 1.2.17 the more receptive the PMC would be to approve it. After all, the goal is to be a drop in replacement. Whatever happens I would not expect a release vote to be unanimous. More than one PMC member simply believe that end-of-life means end-of-life. Ralph > On Jan 6, 2022, at 12:07 PM, Leo Simons <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey Ceki, > > Builds and tests were already fixed up, see the most recent outstanding > PRs. Might be faster to cherry-pick rather than to re-do; if you start to > move things around you’ll have a hard time merging anything in. > > Cheers, > > Leo > > On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 at 19:39, Ceki Gülcü <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Hello all, >> >> I have created the v1.2.8 branch under logging-log4j1.git [1]. I Will >> proceed to move tests under the standard Maven location and have them >> pass under surefire (without ant). >> >> This might take a while but should be feasible. >> >> [1] https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j1.git >> >> >> -- >> Ceki Gülcü >> >> Please contact suppport(at)qos.ch for donations, sponsorship or support >> contracts related to SLF4J or logback projects. >>
