On the basis that log analysis and error identification/reporting costs
money, and the more complex this process is the more it costs.
An error log contains less clutter and is the first point in identification
and triage of (severe) issues in any organisation that has adopted a
methodology for service delivery (e.g. ITIL, ISO/IEC 20000, etc),
specifically the error control process (in ITIL)

Without this OOTB more time is spend on:

   - going through the other, more detailed log(s) in the various OFBiz
   systems an organisation might have (e.g. dev, test, prod, etc)
   - getting the error log back and ensuring that it stays in.



Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Scott Gray <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On what basis?
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> On 12/09/2014, at 9:44 pm, Pierre Smits <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I support reverting this regression.
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > Services and Retail & Trade
> > http://www.orrtiz.com
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sep 12, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
> >> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't understand why you are so not open to put back the error.log in
> >> log4j2.xml
> >>
> >> Because it is just one of 1 million possible ways to configure logging:
> it
> >> is a specific one on not a generic one and so it is not better than the
> >> other 1 million possibilities; you have explained why you like it but
> me or
> >> others could find similar arguments for the other millions ways; since
> no
> >> one seconded you in your attempt to add the configuration back this
> >> confirms to me that this specific configuration is not better than
> other;
> >> for this reason it should be left out of the trunk.
> >>
> >>> and qualify this as a mess and almost myself and idiot.
> >>
> >> I didn't say this and the mail archive can demonstrate it; you have been
> >> trying to raise the tone of the conversation since the beginning of this
> >> thread (and you did the same in at least another thread recently) but I
> >> will not start to fight with you.
> >>
> >> Jacopo
> >>
> >>
>
>

Reply via email to