I think we can drop the "2" branding from the site as well. We could also put a stronger emphasis on the version site as "1.x" but a banner pointing to 2.x. Perhaps not a strong as the Jakarta red banner but something like: "For the current version of Log4j, please click here"
Gary On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]> wrote: > Regarding 3.0, I think it's going to be a bit of an image problem to get > there -- a little uphill battle. Right now the entire website is branded as > a "2" site.... to separate it from the decades long fandom of the 1.x site. > I am not blaming anyone for that decision. It was necessary to > differentiate 2.x from 1.x.... > > But it does paint the project a bit into the corner going forward. IMO, > you wouldn't want 3.x to be so completely different in its documentation, > would you? Even right now, if you go to the site, it really is "Apache > Log4j 2" and not simply "Apache Log4j" in the page. Do you see what I am > trying to say? > > I know this is unsolicited advice, but I just want to throw my opinion out > there to help planning the future. Before you guys try 3.0, take some time > to eliminate the hard barrier between 1.x/2.x in your website. Make it just > one so that 3.x documentation naturally fits in. > > Cheers, > Paul > -- E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
