Where was the GitHub fork when it was EOL'd? Or when development
effectively stopped 4 years ago?

On 14 July 2016 at 12:12, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:

> And get ready for a GitHub fork...
>
> Gary
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I agree. We announced that Log4j 1.2 is end of life. We have a
>> replacement that is better than Log4j 1.2 in pretty much every way.
>>
>> In my opinion we should
>> a) make sure Log4j 2 is ready for Java 9
>> b) start announcing that Log4j 1.2 will not work with Java 9 so people
>> can start planning their migration
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> That was exactly what my “mixed emotions” were about.
>>>
>>> Also, I think we are going to have a fair amount of work to really
>>> support Java 9.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On Jul 14, 2016, at 9:44 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Any Log4j 1 release is likely to open the floodgates of requests to fix
>>> any outstanding "simple" (or complex) bugs.
>>>
>>> Keep in mind that Java 9 is not official yet, so we could be opening
>>> ourselves to a series of Java 9 EA compatible releases as Java 9 with and
>>> without Jigsaw (these are still separate builds IIRC) gets developed.
>>>
>>> Tracking Java 9 EAs with Log4j 2 is likely to be enough work as it is...
>>> if we do want to do that now...
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Strategically I don't see why doing another 1.2 release would be a good
>>>> idea.
>>>> If people can upgrade to Java 9 with all the regression testing that
>>>> implies, then I see no reason they would not also upgrade to Log4j 2...
>>>> Naturally Log4j 2 needs to be in good shape for Java 9 and we would
>>>> support users who did customizations to Log4j 1.2.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Ralph Goers <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That would rule out building on a Mac.  I’d have to try it from a
>>>>> Linux VM.  I think Gary might have built Log4j 1 in the past.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 14, 2016, at 8:52 AM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt, I guess you need JDK 1.4.2 on your machine to have artifact
>>>>> "sun.jdk:tools:jar:1.4.2".
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> How do you even build log4j 1.2? I get this error when I build from
>>>>>> trunk:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
>>>>>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2:run (javadoc.resources) 
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> project log4j: Execution javadoc.resources of goal
>>>>>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2:run failed: Plugin
>>>>>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-antrun-plugin:1.2 or one of its 
>>>>>> dependencies
>>>>>> could not be resolved: Could not find artifact sun.jdk:tools:jar:1.4.2 at
>>>>>> specified path
>>>>>> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_66.jdk/Contents/Home/jre/../Classes/classes.jar
>>>>>> -> [Help 1]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14 July 2016 at 10:47, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why would we want to do that? We need to make sure that Log4j 2
>>>>>>> works well with Java 9, but otherwise I think this is an excellent
>>>>>>> opportunity for users to upgrade to Log4j 2.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Remko
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Paul Benedict <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> According to this poster, it appears 1.x is not compatible with JDK
>>>>>>>> 9:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2016-July/008654.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I told them I would notify our development community. So here's the
>>>>>>>> notification. :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Given how widely used 1.x is still, what do you guys think of one
>>>>>>>> more 1.x release? Usually I would never entertain the suggestion, but 
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> may be the one time the justification makes sense. For those who still 
>>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>>> 1.x and have no time to upgrade to 2.x, I can't think of a better way 
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> support the user community than fix this issue.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PS: Inside the post is a link to the supposed patch.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
Matt Sicker <[email protected]>

Reply via email to