> Yet nothing is stopping people to bash us, for work we aren't paid for, for a feature we all dislike yet needed to keep due to backward compatibility concerns

> Yet nothing is stopping people to bash us, for work we aren't paid for, for a feature we all dislike yet needed to keep due to backward compatibility concerns. Does log4j not utilize a versioning scheme that has the notion of "breaking changes"? Anyone following semver, for example, could simply release a major to do away with an extremely troubling, and apparently well-known, back compat issue. Sounds like folks are right to criticize for poor decision making.