On Wednesday 14 April 2004 10:45 am, Andreas Jung wrote:
For consitency: Zope.Products.XXXX For lazy writers: Zope. XXXXX
I prefer the second solution...everyone should know what are products and what are packages. In fact the name does not matter because you can see in the traceback where the error occurs. You don't get this information from the name directly.
I disagree. Not everyone that looks at the logs will be a site developer or Zope product or core developer. Keeping things explicit is reasonable.
Keep the product name as it is...means Products/XXXX should use Zope.XXXX as logger name. No need to introduce a new mapping. Keep it simple.
Keeping it simple is good, but I'd still like to see every logging subsystem in code that ships with the Zope 2 core start with "Zope." This is a potential backwards compatibility issue, though, since log-trawling tools are already using the names currently generated, as inconsistent as they are. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fred at zope.com> PythonLabs at Zope Corporation