Backport fix for LOGBACK-1027 from 1.3.x.

[ellebrecht]

For users of Logback 1.2.x suffering from LOGBACK-1027, provide a solution by backporting the fix from the master branch.

[klya]

Actually this field looks useless.

[klya]

@ceki could you merge this? logback 1.2.6 is currently in production and LOGBACK-1027 hurts us a lot.

[mrmegapolys]

Also asking for merge, affects our production as well.

[CriPstian]

Hi 👋 !
This is really a difficult issue to go around without losing important logging data until the next stable release.
Is there anything else to be done except merging this and creating the next tag? 🏷️

I would be more than happy to help if possible 👍

[harsh-tamr]

Same here really want this to be merged in

[zeldigas]

@ceki +1 for backport and merge. It's very disappointing that such an issue is not fixed in current stable branch

[ceki]

Given the large number of issues that must be attended do, you are welcome to sponsor any bug fix or feature. Please see feature/bug sponsorship.

[zeldigas]

Nice price for backport, but I've got your point ;)

[harsh-tamr]

Can this be merged?

[zeldigas]

@ceki getting back to business - so how much in total it'd cost to get this back port merged properly and push new version to maven central? Just one of mentioned packages (any? Largest?) or both?

[zeldigas]

@ceki sorry for being boring but I just want to better understand is there any timelines for merging this exact fix and doing 1.2.11 release if sponsorship will be provided? I mean that currently overal flow is not clear - what will happen in this case and how it is compared to "when it's done". If you'd have some regular cadence then such question will not be risen, but looking at current releases I don't see any regularity in 1.2.x branch: https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ch.qos.logback/logback-classic

For example some clear statement like below would be totally fine for me:

release sponsorship would help me to find time for release creation within 2 months since you apply for sponsorship and issue 535 will be included in upcoming release

where 2 month are just for example here.

[madhead]

Is it possible to partially sponsor this? I won't be able to convice my company to make a one-time payment, but I could send a few bucks on my own. And I guess others here could contribute to the $800 goal too! Together we could afford it, don't we?

[ceki]

This PR removes the compatibility layer with Java 1.6 with no mention of the removal. This PR, were it applied as is, would break software running under Java 1.6.

[ceki]

Fixed in 1.2.11 released earlier today.