httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com>
Subject Re: Error codes
Date Mon, 28 Nov 2011 16:29:30 GMT

On Nov 28, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:

> On Monday 28 November 2011, Rich Bowen wrote:
>> 1) Create file in svn that lists sequential error codes so that we
>> know what the next number is. The file should list error code and
>> the file in which it is used. Should probably also list line
>> number, although that changes over time, so it's approximate.
> 
> The file names and line numbers can easily be extracted by a script (I 
> am volunteering to write it), no need to track these manually.

Excellent. Time saving is always a good thing. :)

> 
>> 2) Find all calls to *_log_?error (Stefan says there's 2700+ such
>> calls!) and add the next error code to the beginning of the
>> message. In parens, perhaps?. Update the file in #1.
> 
> I would prefer "AH1234: Don't panic". It's one character shorter than 
> "(AH1234) Don't panic" and horizontal screen space is always short 
> when viewing the error log.

Sounds good to me.

> 
> A question on procedure: Do you want to add all error codes at once 
> and then fill in the descriptions or add the error codes as the 
> documentation evolves? If the former, some scripting would probably 
> save a lot of work, too.

If it can be done all at once with a script, that would be great. The only concern from there
would be the ease of applying that change to earlier versions. Presumably the trunk ->
2.4 patch would work pretty well, but -> 2.2 would take a lot of work. Not sure that it
would be worth it, though. I'm in favor of making this a 2.4-only effort.

> 
> I am not sure that every debug message needs a code, maybe one could 
> at first only tag those of level info or higher? Or maybe even 
> warning?

Ah. Good point. Yes, we should probably skip stuff in Debug, unless it makes sense to add
them on a case-by-case basis later on. (Not sure what would justify that, but perhaps some
messages are more common than others? More important? More … something.) I would say warn
and higher, but perhaps it merits further discussion. Adding them to info now might save hassle
later on if we wanted to further document those, and costs us nothing now, except for 6 characters
in the log message. What do folks think?


--
Rich Bowen
rbowen@rcbowen.com :: @rbowen
rbowen@apache.org







Mime
View raw message