What about binary compatibility? Gary
<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> </div><div>Date:07/12/2014 08:31 (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: Log4J Developers List <log4j-dev@logging.apache.org> </div><div>Subject: Re: Next release </div><div> </div>I would really like to do the 2.0 release vote this weekend. Bruce, based on what I've seen from the patch, the API changes you have in mind will not be very disruptive (as you already mentioned). If addressing this issue will take some time, I would prefer to release 2.0 this weekend and do the fix in an upcoming release. (And of course creating a branch is always fine.) On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Bruce Brouwer <bruce.brou...@gmail.com> wrote: Shall I make a branch for this and check in what I have? If we really want to push to get this out soon maybe someone else could help out on the branch. On Jul 11, 2014 11:30 PM, "Gary Gregory" <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: Sure looks like worth fixing. Leaks are nasty, even if it is a corner case, someone will hit it. Unfortunately I have no time this weekend. Gary -------- Original message -------- From: Bruce Brouwer Date:07/11/2014 23:11 (GMT-05:00) To: Log4J Developers List Subject: Re: Next release I know I haven't had time to spend on this project lately, but I never finished off LOG4J2-609. If you're itching to release this weekend, then I won't be able to get this done. The solution I'm presenting is a little bit invasive in the "API", but I think the current solution has some real problems. The details are in the JIRA. I only bring it up in case you think this area of the API should not be allowed to change after 2.0. It is kind of off in a corner where most people won't go, so maybe it will be acceptable to fix for a 2.1 release. Where it stands right now, I don't have the tests working, which I now thing is showing a problem with something in my solution. What are your thoughts? Other than that, I would really like to see 2.0 released. On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: On Friday, July 11, 2014, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: No objection at all! I would like to add the tool to generate Custom/Extended Loggers, and do a doc fix for LOG4J2-631. Done with these changes. Also, the site now has an empty section "Custom Plugins" under manual > Extending Log4j. Shall we remove that before the release? I haven't had time to do this. I may not have time today either. Perhaps not that urgent anyway... One more thing (gentle reminder): let's not forget to change to the new logo. :-) Sent from my iPhone > On 2014/07/11, at 15:50, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > I would like to do the release for Log4j 2.0 this weekend. Are there any > objections? > > Ralph > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org > -- Bruce Brouwer about.me/bruce.brouwer
