couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randall Leeds <randall.le...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: The perfect logger for development
Date Wed, 07 Dec 2011 21:09:01 GMT
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:52, Randall Leeds <randall.leeds@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 08:38, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Adam Kocoloski <kocolosk@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> On Dec 7, 2011, at 4:51 AM, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Jason Smith <jhs@iriscouch.com>
wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks, Benoit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to move the discussion back, one hundred percent, to
>>>>>> identifying exactly what features are good and bad for CouchDB. We
are
>>>>>> in no hurry. IMHO, CouchDB does not need a patch soon. It needs
>>>>>> thoughtful, deliberate planning.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> yes and no . We don't need to be 100% to start implementation. For
>>>>> example we could just replace our current logger by lagger which would
>>>>> give us automatically support for different backend, log rotations &
>>>>> co and prepare for more attributes as well.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Benoit, let's respect Jason's request when he started this thread:
>>>>
>>>>> Seriously, please don't even mention a product or project by name.
>>>
>
> I'm on board with this. Let's just whiteboard a little more.
> I pretty much agree with everything specified so far.
>
> One point I would add (I didn't see it) is that it should be  possible
> to wholesale swap out the logging system with a compatible one via a
> config change.
> That's kind of in line with my thinking about couchdb in general these days.

That may actually be an unreasonable request and I'm not sure exactly
what I meant by it.

>
>>
>> Also I think we need some kind of CEP (couchdb enhancement proposal)
>> like EEP but for couchdb to discuss about new features like this. So
>> the people that propose that would have to do the job to be really
>> clear, (without any mystic) and such thing. With the versionning
>> advantage and comment on particular points.
>
> That could be interesting. Want to start a thread about it? I think
> this ties in nicely with the momentum around documentation
> improvements.
>
> -Randall

Mime
View raw message