Re: [log4j2] Name and versions

> Thanks for looking at this.
>
> The choices I considered were
>
> 1)
> <groupId>org.apache.logging.log4j</groupId>
> <artifactId>log4j2</artifactId>
> <version>1.x<//version>
>
> 2)
> <groupId>org.apache.logging</groupId>
> <artifactId>log4j2</artifactId>
> <version>1.x</version>
>
> 3)
> <groupId>org.apache.logging</groupId>
> <artifactId>log4j</groupId>
> <version>2.x</version>
>
> I preferred 1 but am OK with 2.  I didn't like 3 simply because the doc was talking about Log4j 2.0 and I quickly realized we would have a 2.1 and then the doc would be strange.  So I shortened it to Log4j 2 and then thought it looked better as log4j2.  It just seemed more natural to start numbering that at 1.0.
>
> Also, 2.0 isn't binary compatible with 1.x (except for the log4j 1.x adapter - which can't be 100% compatible either), but that isn't unusual in a major release change.
>
> Ralph
>
> On Apr 27, 2012, at 3:05 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I saw:
>> https://people.apache.org/~rgoers/log4j2/download.html
>>
>> The release name is for example:
>> apache-log4j2-1.0-alpha1.tar.gz
>>
>> Isn't this a little bit confusing?
>>
>> I was under the impression it should be like this:
>>
>> <artifactId>log4j</artifactId>
>> <version>2.0-alpha1-SNAPSHOT</version>
>>
>> Thus the name is log4j 2.0 and not log4j2 1.0.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Cheers
>> Christian
>>
>> --
>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>> https://www.timeandbill.de
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@...
>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@...
>>
>