logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: [Vote] Log4j 2.0-alpha1 rc1
Date Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:58:56 GMT
I've just released rc2 and want to comment on some items below that were not addressed.

On Jul 17, 2012, at 1:10 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:

> Hello,
> tag is building (mvn test) and the reports (rat etc) look all fine. I
> would like to suggest we add Findbugs after this release.
> MD5/ASC files all are fine. I could see that LICENSES files etc were
> all fine too.
> I have some minor stuff here:
> - Incosistent use of name:  Apache Log4j2 2.0-alpha1 -> Apache log4j
> 2.0-alpha1 (Release notes)
> Name is lowercase and without 2 in it
> - Branding: Footer on webpage is not containing everything (see log4j1
> site for details)
> - META-INF Dependencies contains this entry: From: 'an unknown organization'
>  - geronimo-jms_1.1_spec
> org.apache.geronimo.specs:geronimo-jms_1.1_spec:jar:1.0
>  Found in log4j-core-2.0-alpha1-sources.jar

From what I can tell this is a problem with how the geronimo jar is released and can't be
fixed by Log4j.

> - Footer in Javadoc does not meet branding requirements (same footer
> as in website)
> - http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/dependencies.html does show
> no dependencies, but
> http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/dependency-management.html
> does. Does it mean log4j 2.0 does only have optional runtime
> dependencies?

The parent project has no code and should have no dependencies. It does declare versions of
artifacts that should be used by all sub-projects. The actual dependencies show up in the
child projects.

> - http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/source-repository.html shows
> the tag, wouldn't it be better to show the trunk?
> - Release-Notes.txt does not match:
> http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/changes-report.html or
> http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/jira-report.html

The notes are constructed using the changes plugin which incorporates both the changes and
some of the jira issues (but not all), so it will differ from the changes report (which does
not include Jira) and the Jira report (which includes all the Jiras).

> - http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/changelog.html does not have
> a release date and only points to the JIRA change log
> - http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/surefire-report.html is empty?

See the child projects.

> - http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/build.html section "Using"
> is missing. Is the intented?
> - Topbar: i think it's enough to only link to the main logging site,
> no need to point to companions or log4j1. If Chainsaw is compatible
> with log4j2 then it could be pointed to that
> I am willing to +1 this as this is only minor stuff, but I think I
> would prefer to fix/discuss some of the problems above. The multiple
> Changes reports are confusing, the branding is easy to fix and just
> the naming (capitals or not) is one of the things which would require
> more work. I mention the naming here again because we have discussed
> that for a long while on the example of log4php. We agreed the log4php
> is all in lower case. I don't remember if this was a global discussion
> or just for log4php, but I think it was more or less global.
> Personally I am not opposed to leave it Log4j 2.0 but this is the
> first release, we should do it proper.
> Cheers

To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

View raw message