/bylaws.html
Regards.
From: João Jandre Paraquetti
Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2023 01:36
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org ;
dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Upgrade Log4j to Log4j2
Hi all,
This voting has been going on for quite some time already. In the
Jandre Paraquetti
Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2023 01:36
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org ;
dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Upgrade Log4j to Log4j2
Hi all,
This voting has been going on for quite some time already. In the
meantime, more tests have been done and the PR has been verified
Hi all,
This voting has been going on for quite some time already. In the
meantime, more tests have been done and the PR has been verified as
working with both mbx and BO.
As we did not get any -1 votes, and achieved the minimum of three +1s, I
will therefore close this vote and propose we p
Important effort in this work!
[ ] +1 approve
Regards,
Sidimar Carniel
Em qua., 17 de mai. de 2023 às 10:27, Rodrigo D. Lopez <
rodrigoduartelo...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Thanks for the great work!
>
> Based on discussions in PR and the discussion thread[1]. My vote is +1.
>
> Log4j v1 (deprec
Thanks for the great work!
Based on discussions in PR and the discussion thread[1]. My vote is +1.
Log4j v1 (deprecated) and its current alternative reload4j in use in ACS
are not ideal for the long run. Therefore, for the future of ACS, and to
enable us to keep evolving, the upgrade is most welc
-0
Joao, Daniel reacted negatively to my question to create a proxy with bad
arguments and I had no time to respond yet. I think not adding a proxy at
this time is a missed opportunity and I would full heartedly +1 if we had.
Not creating a proxy class (with or without configurability) is a waste
Hello, João
Considering the discussion we had in the thread[1] and that the conflicts
will be mostly regarding loggers names (which is simple to fix), I am +1 on
the proposal.
Best regards,
Daniel Salvador (gutoveronezi)
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/261j7m0p5mr4q7yclvo49mwhkxz4yov2
On Tu
Hello guys,
I am opening this voting thread as result of the discussion in thread
"ACS upgrade to Log4J2 version 2.19"[1].
The voting aims to continue the efforts and conclude the upgrade of the
ACS logging library to Log4j2 through PR 7131[2]; merge the PR as soon
as possible and provide wa
