For instance, suppose I want to drop the level of all log messages in the
parent logger "org.example.project" by one priority except for error. So
this would map WARN -> INFO, INFO -> DEBUG, etc. I'm not exactly sure on a
DSL here, but it's more of a thought than a feature request right now.

On 20 April 2017 at 15:13, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote:

> I’d have to see an example to understand the benefit.  As it is right now
> you have to configure a logger for each thing you want to manage at its own
> logging level. If you were going to “re-write” the logging level how would
> you do that without having to configure each logger with the new level?
> The only difference I can see is that the level in the output would now be
> different than what is specified in the code.
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Apr 20, 2017, at 12:00 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > The conversations there make me think that some sort of ability to
> rewrite
> > log levels emitted from various loggers at configuration time could be
> > useful. For instance, some libraries are rather spammy in the info or
> warn
> > level, and having to suppress all non-error messages from those
> frameworks
> > doesn't seem like an ideal way to configure things. It could be more
> > complicated than it's worth, however.
> >
> > On 20 April 2017 at 13:22, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Interesting comments. In the typical reddit fashion, I propose a
> Buzzfeed
> >> listicle on logging based on the thread. Or at least some manual
> >> enhancements.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 06:28, Mikael Ståldal <
> [email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/66ftqf/
> >>> logging_levels_the_wrong_abstraction/
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> [image: MagineTV]
> >>>
> >>> *Mikael Ståldal*
> >>> Senior software developer
> >>>
> >>> *Magine TV*
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
> >>>
> >>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
> >>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
> >>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may
> not
> >>> copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
> >>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply
> >>> email.
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>
>
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <[email protected]>

Reply via email to