Hi Alex,
Thanks for your interest in this. Hopefully this will be a good first step for any further logging changes in the future, so will be helpful with logging to Google Cloud. To be clear, I wasn't expecting this go into the 1.8 release at this stage. Having it in for the next release after that would be nice, though. Thanks, Robin Miller OLIVER WYMAN [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> www.oliverwyman.com<http://www.oliverwyman.com/> ________________________________ From: Alex Van Boxel <[email protected]> Sent: 01 February 2017 12:55:42 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Airflow Logging Updates Hey Robin, I also have an interest in logging, but to get Google Cloud logging to work. I'm happy to work with you on this. But *first* the 1.8 needs to go out. But I don't think this will go on the patch branch, but maybe for the next release. I don't know what the other people think. On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 11:58 AM Miller, Robin < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi All, > > > A while ago we took over this issue: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-409, which revolved around > avoiding making changes to the root python logging configuration so as to > avoid any accidental side effects that this could produce in other python > applications. > > > The approach we decided on was to avoid use of the root logger entirely > and produce a single configuration point for the logging to allow it to be > configured pretty much however is desired in one place (with currently > fairly simple options, but this could be made as complex or configurable as > desired with changes to only a single file). > > > As you might expect this affects a lot of the code, as it requires > changing every log statement that's contains "logging.Info", > "logging.Error", etc. > > > The pull request for this, > https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1921, has been open for > almost 2 months now and unsurprisingly now has merge conflicts. We'll > happily clean these up, but would prefer to do so at the time this is being > reviewed, otherwise more will inevitably appear. > > > So I'm wondering, is this issue/pull request likely to get any attention > soon? Or is this change simply unwanted? > > > Thanks, > > Robin Miller > OLIVER WYMAN > [email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]> > www.oliverwyman.com<http://www.oliverwyman.com/> > > > ________________________________ > This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. > If you received this message in error or are not the intended recipient, > you should destroy the e-mail message and any attachments or copies, and > you are prohibited from retaining, distributing, disclosing or using any > information contained herein. Please inform us of the erroneous delivery by > return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. > -- _/ _/ Alex Van Boxel ________________________________ This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you received this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the e-mail message and any attachments or copies, and you are prohibited from retaining, distributing, disclosing or using any information contained herein. Please inform us of the erroneous delivery by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation.
