logging-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [log4j] MongoDB driver 2.x vs. 3.x
Date Mon, 22 Jan 2018 06:43:21 GMT
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

> If the mongo 2 and mongo 3 Java 9 module names are going to be different
> then their package names must unique. JPMS requires that a Java package
> reside in only one module.
>
> As a general rule, if you change the artifactId the package name should be
> changed as well.
>
> I agree that it is probably best to allow both to coexist.
>

Check and will do.

I have the MongoDb3 plugin sitting on my machine in a new module. For now,
I'll rename the current plugin to "2", and rename everything related
tomorrow (package, artifact ID, Java 9 module name, and so on.)

Tracking here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2209

I want to see where "The Shape of Log4j" email thread is going. I'm still
looking for a plan... ;-)

Gary


>
> Ralph
>
>
> > On Jan 21, 2018, at 5:13 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 4:20 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> What do you mean by “renaming”?
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > What I mean is that the Maven module's artifact ID 'log4j-mongodb' would
> be
> > renamed to 'log4j-mongodb2' in the pom.xml file. The Java 9 module name
> in
> > pom.xml would be adjusted as well.
> >
> > We could also optionally rename the package
> > 'org.apache.logging.log4j.mongodb' to 'org.apache.logging.log4j.
> mongodb2'
> > which would be cleaner and I would prefer but probably not required.
> >
> >
> >
> >> I don’t know that it would be a good idea for both the Mongo 2 & 3
> plugins
> >> to have the same plugin name.
> >
> >
> > They would not have the same name: One would be postfixed with '2', the
> > other with '3'. I am assuming that when we talk about 'plugin names' we
> are
> > in fact talking about POM artifact IDs.
> >
> >
> >> Although it is not likely they would ever be used together if they do it
> >> would be impossible to ever have both at the same time.
> >>
> >
> > Agreed, but I work in large stacks and there is no telling what customers
> > end up with in their apps. I want to avoid jar hell as much as possible.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >>> On Jan 21, 2018, at 3:56 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi All:
> >>>
> >>> As I am working through https://issues.apache.org/
> >> jira/browse/LOG4J2-2205
> >>> to migrate from 2.x to 3.x APIs in the module log4j-mongodb, I am
> >> concerned
> >>> that the changes are large enough as to break some older apps. I am
> sure
> >> I
> >>> wouldn't hear about it until my customers complain.
> >>>
> >>> Therefore, I think I would like to:
> >>>
> >>> - create a new module log4j-mongodb3
> >>> - rename the existing module from log4j-mongodb to log4j-mongodb2
> >>>
> >>> I know that we are having an active discussion about new modules in the
> >>> main repository so I'll hold off on log4j-mongodb3.
> >>>
> >>> What I do wonder though is if renaming a module is a problem.
> >>>
> >>> Gary
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message