Re: Log level, compatibility

[Vadim Gritsenko <va...@verizon.net>]

Geoff Howard wrote:

> At 02:14 AM 6/4/2003, Konstantin wrote:
>
>> +1 for lowering the log level to WARN.
>> But it'd be much better to provide two (or more) typical configurations,
>> e.g.:
>>   - development: log level - DEBUG, development cache settings, etc.
>>   - testing: log level - WARN, etc. 
>

INFO should be even better.


>>   - production: log level - ERROR, etc.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
...

> Any takers to help me out? 


Why not simply error.level in build.properties and ant filtering of 
logkit.xconf? Simple, and no additional code.

Vadim

RE: Log level, compatibility

[Geoff Howard <co...@leverageweb.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vadim Gritsenko [mailto:vadim.gritsenko@verizon.net]

> Geoff Howard wrote:
>
> > At 02:14 AM 6/4/2003, Konstantin wrote:
> >
> >> +1 for lowering the log level to WARN.
> >> But it'd be much better to provide two (or more) typical
> configurations,
> >> e.g.:
> >>   - development: log level - DEBUG, development cache settings, etc.
> >>   - testing: log level - WARN, etc.
> >
>
> INFO should be even better.
>
> ...
>
> > Any takers to help me out?
>
>
> Why not simply error.level in build.properties and ant filtering of
> logkit.xconf? Simple, and no additional code.
>
> Vadim

That would work for this case but the build is not currently filtering
logkit.xconf is it?  In general people have asked for this ability, and
I'd find it useful.  Doesn't need to be tied to any log level change though,
just fishing. ;)

As an update, I tried using org.apache.tools.ant.filters.ExpandProperties
which extends java.io.Reader to wrap the File object on the way in to the
DocumentBuilder, but was getting errors.

Geoff