On 12 May 2015 at 17:30, Anil Madhavapeddy <[email protected]> wrote:
>> If I understand this correctly, this means that there is one branch for
>> errors, one for warnings etc. I have some doubts about this since messages
>> occuring in a given level may be due to a message occuring in another level
>> (you get a warning because there was an error). So it seems preferable to
>> have the linear occurences of each level in the same branch. I would rather
>> see branches being used for delineating components.
>
> Agreed. I had in mind a branching structure that would include a branch per
> component, followed by the debug levels. Other listeners could then do
> aggregation into different views, including operations such as time-based
> rotation and aggregation across components. For an Irmin backend, such
> listeners can just be watchers (either offline or online, which is nice!).
>
Sorry, may be being slow but if I understand you both right this means:
+ one Irmin log ("repo"?)
+ each component has its own branch within that log
then either
+ within each component branch, there is a linear sequence of messages
at different levels
or
+ within each component branch, there is a hierarchy of subordinate
branches, branching each time a message appears at a lower (finer
grained) debug level
?
--
Richard Mortier
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel
