Lets please keep it "log4j" and not make it log4j2. And let's not party like its 1999 either and make it log4j24u ;)
So log4j 2.0 is what I think is best. Gary On Saturday, April 28, 2012, Ralph Goers wrote: > I think a global change in the doc from log4j2 to log4j 2 would be fine. > I'm busy with my grand kids today and part of tomorrow so if you'd like to > handle it that would be fine. > > Sent from my iPad > > On Apr 28, 2012, at 2:18 PM, Christian Grobmeier <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> These are all very good points If you would look > >> at http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/index.html as one example > page > >> and help figure out how to change it so that when we are at log4j 2.1.2 > the > >> page doesn't feel awkward because it is talking about 2.0 then I'd be OK > >> with this. I suppose one option would be to change all the log4j2 > >> references to "log4j 2.x". > > > > Yes, that would be fine i think. > > > > Looking at the Struts pages (we maintain version 1.x and 2.x there > > too) there is the talk of Struts 2 simply, even when the versions are > > for example Struts 2.3.2. Maybe we can simply talk about log4j 2 (with > > space between) which refers to 2.x.x versions? > > > > By the way, wasn't there a discussion about the capitalization? I > > remember we renamed every "Log4php" to "log4php" because it is lower > > case. I meanwhile found a few examples with upper case. > > > > I should mention I am glad to help fixing the naming. ;-) > > > >> > >> FWIW, I've looked at commons lang - http://commons.apache.org/lang/ - > and > >> you will notice it refers to itself as both lang 3.0 and lang3 because > they > >> changed both the package name (org.apache.commons.lang3) and the version > >> number (3.0). On the other hand, Commons VFS, which I released, is > >> documented only as VFS or VFS 2.0 even though it also changed its > package > >> name to org.apache.commons.vfs2. However, in that case VFS 2.0 was > very, > >> very similar to VFS 1.x. Commons Math > >> - http://commons.apache.org/math/index.html - also seems to refer to > itself > >> as commons math even though it is also org.apache.commons.math3. > > > > Yes, thats true. > > > > Package renaming is recently done when creating a non-bc release. > > Since we have different packages as you pointed out below, this is no > > problem for us - now. > > Later we might have a log4j 3 and we might need to rename package to > > org.apache.logging.log4j3. But in the log4j case, I would say this is > > 10 years ahead.... > > > >> > >> A difference that we have is that Log4j 1.x used > >> > >> package - org.apache.log4j > >> groupId - log4j > >> artifactId - log4j > >> > >> Where we are now using > >> package - org.apache.logging.log4j > >> groupId - org.apache.logging.log4j > >> artifactId - log4j2-* > >> > >> Since the package and groupId are already unique from Log4j 1.x the > notion > >> of having the "2" in the artifactId (or package) isn't necessary. > > > > I agree. This makes it easier for log4j 2. > > > > Cheers > > Christian > > > >> > >> Ralph > >> > >> On Apr 28, 2012, at 5:12 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > >> > >> Thanks Ralph for explaining the background on this. > >> > >> Actually I am for version 3. It confuses me to see at leats 3 numbers > >> in the name. Imaging the following version number: log4j2 2.2.2-BETA2 > >> gives me headache. > >> My current fave for version numbers is http://semver.org/ > >> > >> As you already mentioned, for a major release number bump it is > >> natural that bc goes away. That being said I don't see reason why we > >> would need to make an explicit 2 after log4j. What, if we would level > >> to another log4j? Lets say v3 is not bc with log4j2 2.0. Then we would > >> have either log4j3 1.0 or log4j2 3.0. > >> > >> Basically the name log4j2 as we use it now is a change of the product > >> name and we should be carefully with that. It is the same as log4j-xt > >> or log4java or log4j-nextgeneration. > >> > >> I would feel better if we could stick with the original project name > >> log4j and just use version numbering to express the changes. > >> > >> On Sat, -- E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0 Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory <http://twitter.com/GaryGregory>
