I've been wondering about this myself. I think we should re-look at how providers are specified as the current solution didn't work well with OSGi. Plus we kept forgetting to update it with new API versions.
On 3 March 2017 at 13:17, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: > I created LOG4J2-1836 to address this. > > Ralph > > > On Mar 3, 2017, at 12:01 PM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Likewise, I suspect that ProviderUtil should only list 2.6.0 as a > compatible version since the implementation must be at that level or higher. > > > > Ralph > > > >> On Mar 3, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> The Log4jAPIVersion in log4j-provider.properties in log4j-core says it > supports the 2.1.0 API. Is that actually correct? I suspect that if you > try to use the log4j 2.1 API jar with the log4j 2.8.1 core jar there will > be problems. Doesn’t Log4j core require a Log4j API jar that is at least > at the 2.6 version? > >> > >> Ralph > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
