> If you need > instead of >= why not use this logger and keep the > default logger as it is - I know this may be inconvenient but the way > the logger works right now seems to be appropriate for most people, or > we would have had more complaints.
Not sure this is the kind of thing people complain about. The code was backwards from the first implementation in June to when I fixed in it December, and I don't know if anyone complained about it. (And it was clearly broken; it would print more info in -quiet mode than -verbose.) I agree with Jason, that this message is a little too verbose for the default mode. Maybe what you really want is for it to print out the current target only when there's some other message printed later (like an error). In others words targetStarted() would save the current target's name, and print out what it's printing now in messageLogged(), if it hadn't already been printed for the current target. --Alex
