Isn’t the goal of Tika 2 to mean that we no longer work on Tika 1? Does the Tika community have enough developer bandwidth to continue to maintain Tika 1 while also pushing forward on Tika 2?
I worry that we’ll fall into that situation where people just end up using Tika 1 for forever, especially if there are new updates to it that are happening, which then encourages folks not to move to Tika 2. > On Dec 13, 2021, at 2:49 PM, Tim Allison <talli...@apache.org> wrote: > > Sounds like 2 +1 to my -0. :D I'll start working on this now. > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 2:09 PM Nicholas DiPiazza > <nicholas.dipia...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I prefer upgrade to log4j2 >> >> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021, 12:05 PM Tim Allison <talli...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> All, >>> I'm currently in the process of building the rc1 for Tika 2.x. On >>> TIKA-3616, Luís Filipe Nassif asked if we could upgrade log4j to >>> log4j2 in the 1.x branch. I think we avoided that because it would be >>> a breaking change(?). There are security vulns in log4j and it hit >>> EOL >>> in August 2015. >>> Should we upgrade the Tika 1.x branch for log4j2? >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> [1] >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-3616?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17457595#comment-17457595 >>> _______________________ Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC | 434.466.1467 | http://www.opensourceconnections.com <http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to be Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of whether attachments are marked as such.
