Thanks, the wording of the %msg{lookup} is definitely incorrect but by the time
it was caught sending out a corrected announcement seemed like it would be even
more confusing.
While you are at it. Could you please take a look at the web site. What we did
was very unusual for us - we skipped building a 2.12.2 web site and just added
some content to 2.12.1 and then
updated the 2.16.0 site to reflect 2.12.0. Having a fresh set of eyes is most
welcome. FWIW, the source for the site is in the log4j main repo as part of the
project source. But the site
itself is in the logging -log4j-site repo. So you could do PRs there for things
that need to be fixed. We hand edited everything and have yet to back port it
to the source but will be
doing that over the next few days.
Ralph
> On Dec 14, 2021, at 4:13 PM, Rainer Jung <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> I know you can't fix the announcements already sent out, but fpr future
> announcements and in case the release announcement text is also part of the
> log4j web pages one should maybe rephrase:
>
> "Log4j 2 is an upgrade to Log4j that provides significant
> improvements ... such as support for... property substitution using
> Lookups..."
>
> The mentioning of lookups here might need clarification. When 2.17.0 gets
> out, people might get afraid, that the lookup problem might have been
> reintroduced.
>
> For the sake of completeness: the 2.16.0 announcement also contained:
>
> "Prior to version 2.15.0, Log4j would automatically resolve Lookups
> contained in the message or its parameters in the Pattern Layout. This
> behavior is no longer the default and must be enabled by specifying
> %msg{lookup}."
>
> AFAIK that was true for 2.15.0, but no longer for 2.16.0. The announcement
> for 2.12.2 instead contained the more correct
>
> "Removed Message Lookups in PatternLayout. "%m{lookup}",
> "%m{nolookup}", and variants will still be accepted as conversion
> patterns, but have no effect."
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
> Rainer
>
