[Zope-CMF] Re: CMF GenericSetup log levels

[yuppie]

Hi Chris!


Chris Withers wrote:
> yuppie wrote:
>> 1.) It would be nice to have a policy for Zope. If the Zope core 
>> officially supports the BLATHER level (not just in the deprecated zLOG 
>> module) I'm fine with using it in GenericSetup as well.
> 
> It doesn't, ZODB has a mapping for it but it's a stupid name left over 
> from before the same timeframe as STUPID_LOGGER and some of the wacky 
> error messages that ZServer used to spit out. I really want it to die :-(

It doesn't right now, but AFAIR the discussion on zope-dev ended without 
a clear result. The question if BLATHER should die isn't CMF specific in 
any way, so I don't want to discuss it on this list.

>> 2.) So far IWriteLogger just defines methods that are also used by the 
>> python logging Logger. If we add a blather method we can no longer use 
>> the python logger as a replacement.
> 
> Hmmm, this sounds odd. Why does IWriteLogger even exist if it just 
> mirrors the python logging interface?

Feel free to contribute a patch if you think this could be implemented 
in a cleaner way. I don't have the time to figure out how to use the 
Python logger for the reports created by the setup tool. The current 
implementation is a wrapper around the Python logger which adds a copy 
of all messages to the _messages list of the setup context.

>> 3.) I don't think all messages should have the same logging level. 
>> E.g. if there are problems that will cause broken setups WARNING might 
>> be appropriate.
> 
> No, .error is what you want here.

No, WARNING is what I want here.

> .warning is for things that are problems but which don't result in 
> broken setups.

By 'broken setups' I meant e.g. if you loose some catalog indexes on 
export/import because no handler exists for those index classes. This is 
a problem you should know about, but maybe you don't care or you fix 
that by hand.


Cheers,

	Yuppie