DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37697>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37697 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-11-29 21:01 ------- I understand about configuring the loggers, which is what I (obviously) did with my hack. I guess I wasn't really clear. I got a bug reported in my product, that's using HttpClient, about console spam, and it ended up being this exact situation. That's what they called it; console spam. And clearly what it is. We already handle the "can't connect" case outselves through the exception, so my users were confused about why they were seeing all this 'spam' in their console. My point was that there's really no need for HttpClient to be this verbose, at the default level. I'm arguing that the particular usages of INFO-level logging aren't appropriate; they should be WARN. Why do I have to fix your code, by hacking log settings, to get a user-friendly scenario? I'm happy with configuring loggers during development. That's not something I'm going to make my users do, which means I need to do it for them. I'm not happy about having to go in and do specific logger tweaking like this. And, of course, I'm worried about all the other INFO-level messages that might leak out of here ... -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
