On Oct 15, 8:21 am, Ivan Sagalaev <man...@softwaremaniacs.org> wrote: > Is it really the case that we want to log everything? I believe that > logging after initialization is enough. And for my example of a logging
That may be true if you're a Django user, but for a Django developer working on Django internals, logging can be a good way of diagnosing problems which could occur anywhere in the system. So the more coverage, the better. > handler that uses ORM it's the only way it can work. Initialization by > definition shouldn't do anything interesting for an application > programmer to look for, it should either succeed or fail with an > exception saying that it "can't run your program, sorry". Again, a logging handler which uses ORM might be fine for many scenarios, but if there's a problem with the ORM system itself you'd probably want to diagnose it using file-based handlers. > As it stands now loading and processing of all the settings is the point > that marks success of initialization. So I'm with Simon in putting > logging somewhere where all the other settings get processed. Try out my patch on ticket #12012. I'm about to update it to show three places where you can hook into Django initialization - Settings.__init__, pre app/model loading and post app/model loading. My test will demonstrate initialization of logging at the first hook point, then capture of the class_prepared signal in pre app/model loading so that model loading can be watched, then post app/model loading to show that you can use models in the hooked code. Regards, Vinay Sajip --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
