tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hls...@comcast.net>
Subject RE: is info level logging appropriate now?
Date Fri, 19 Dec 2003 03:22:52 GMT
At one time I was very proud of all the logging Tapestry did ... but now I have better debuggers
to
use :-)

I, for one, would not object to moving all of those life cycle output down from info to debug.

--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components
http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/sandbox/hivemind/
http://javatapestry.blogspot.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Lewis-Shell [mailto:rlewisshell@mac.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:23 PM
> To: tapestry-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: is info level logging appropriate now?
> 
> 
> i am trying to figure out why websphere is insisting on 
> logging tapestry 3's
> info messages on its console.  websphere appears to configure
> commons-logging to route log messages through its own logging package
> (JRas), so i looked into commons-logging.  this from commons-logging
> documentation 
> (http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/logging/use> rguide.html):
> 
> 
> General - Message Priorities/Levels
> <snip>
> 
> info - Interesting runtime events (startup/shutdown). Expect 
> these to be
> immediately visible on a console, so be conservative and keep 
> to a minimum
> </snip>
> 
> so now it seems reasonable for websphere to show tapestry's LOG.info()
> messages on the console.  what seems less reasonable is that 
> tapestry is
> using info for events that are not (imo) interesting - such 
> as a service
> start/end (AbstractEngine:850,996), adaptor registry loading
> (AdaptorRegistry:160), page loading (PageLoader:882) etc...
> 
> any thoughts?  (if not, i will change at least these messages 
> to debug)
> 
> it seems that there is actually a mismatch between commons-logging and
> log4j.  commons-logging has a level beneath debug: trace.  
> perhaps tapestry
> would be better off if all the messages were shunted down a level. ie.
> info -> debug, debug -> trace.  trace messages end up with 
> log4j as debug
> priority.  this will mean those using log4j will get them all on debug
> priority which seems unfortunate, but it appears to better match
> commons-logging (and thus non log4j logging impls, including JDK 1.4
> logging, and JRas).  any further thoughts?
> 
> R
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message