On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:24:42AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 02:25:02PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 06:43:38AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > Hi Simon,
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:58:56AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > > This seems only to lead to excessive verbosity which seems
> > > > much more appropriate for logs than email.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <ho...@verge.net.au>
> > > > ---
> > > > src/checks.c | 1 -
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/src/checks.c b/src/checks.c
> > > > index 3702d9a4b0fe..efcaff20219b 100644
> > > > --- a/src/checks.c
> > > > +++ b/src/checks.c
> > > > @@ -316,7 +316,6 @@ static void set_server_check_status(struct check
> > > > *check, short status, const cha
> > > >
> > > > Warning("%s.\n", trash.str);
> > > > send_log(s->proxy, LOG_NOTICE, "%s.\n", trash.str);
> > > > - send_email_alert(s, LOG_NOTICE, "%s", trash.str);
> > >
> > > Just a question, shouldn't we keep it and send it as LOG_INFO instead ?
> > > That way users can choose whether to have them or not. Just a suggestion,
> > > otherwise I'm fine with this as well.
> >
> > Good idea, I'll re-spin.
> >
> > In the mean time could you look at the second patch of the series?
> > It is (currently) independent of this one.
>
> Sorry, I wasn't clear, I did so and found it fine. I can merge it
> if you want but just like you I know that merging only parts of
> series causes more trouble than they solve.
Understood, I'll resubmit the entire series.
