What about having two logging configurations? One just for travis, and one pretty much what there is now ( the teardown stuff still has to be sorted out ). Maybe Travis can be scripted to put the right logging properties files in place?
On November 2, 2016 at 12:42:09, Casey Stella ([email protected]) wrote: I haven't seen a JIRA about this yet. IMHO, I think a good first-pass would be: * We have a lot of ERROR level logging that happens because during teardown of the in memory components that could be fixed by tearing down components in the right order (possibly). * Teardown in some of our integration tests don't seem to get called if the tests fail, this causes cascading errors to happen ( the next test won't start because it can't start the components), so ensuring teardown happens in a finally block would be good * If there are chatty components that are inappropriately logging, we can adjust the logging level on a per-package basis. Tender balance between suppressing valuable output and chattiness would ahve to be made (and probably discussed as part of a JIRA). In retrospect, after considering this after the previous discussion on the dev list, I would not be in favor of logging to a file. It is important to see those logs on the travis output to help with quick-debugging help and we'd be setting ourselves up to be non-standard as well. I'd rather see a more directed and surgical effort. That's just my $0.02, though. I'd welcome a JIRA (or multiple JIRAs) to tackle logging. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Otto Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: > Did a jira for this actually get created? I would be willing to help work > on getting the logs setup for what they need to be for travis and for > local. Did we settle on an approach? Is there work ongoing that could use > some dev or testing help? >
