You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@dubbo.apache.org by Cheung Andy <mi...@msn.cn> on 2022/12/13 12:58:30 UTC

[Discussion / Proposal] Make the Dubbo Error Code Inspector 'really' works.

Hi All,

It has been a long time that the Apache Dubbo Error Code Inspector works in tolorence mode due to historical reasons.   Hence, the error-code-inspecting GitHub workflow always passes the test regardless the logging method invocations contains error code or not.

Since almost all logging method invocations have the corresponding error codes, and there're some absences of error codes in the 3.2 branch, in order to raise the awareness of the error code mechanism, I would like to start a discussion that about the timing of making the Error Code Inspector 'really' works.

I do suggest that the Error Code Inspector should 'really' work after the 3.1 branch passes the test. Fell free to state your opinions.

Thanks,
Andy Cheung

Re: [Discussion / Proposal] Make the Dubbo Error Code Inspector 'really' works.

Posted by Cheung Andy <mi...@msn.cn>.

Great, I'll do it at that time.

By the way, sorry for the disturbance of duplicated email. I actually don't familiar with the Apache Mailing List. The first email (the 20 o'clock one) didn't seem to be appeared on that day (until 14 pm of the second day), so I sent again.

-- Andy

Re: [Discussion / Proposal] Make the Dubbo Error Code Inspector 'really' works.

Posted by Albumen Kevin <jh...@gmail.com>.

Agree

On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 2:02 PM Cheung Andy <mi...@msn.cn> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> It has been a long time that the Apache Dubbo Error Code Inspector works
> in tolorence mode due to historical reasons.   Hence, the
> error-code-inspecting GitHub workflow always passes the test regardless the
> logging method invocations contains error code or not.
>
> Since almost all logging method invocations have the corresponding error
> codes, and there're some absences of error codes in the 3.2 branch, in
> order to raise the awareness of the error code mechanism, I would like to
> start a discussion that about the timing of making the Error Code Inspector
> 'really' works.
>
> I do suggest that the Error Code Inspector should 'really' work after the
> 3.1 branch passes the test. Fell free to state your opinions.
>
> Thanks,
> Andy Cheung
>