To be clear, here's how I see it (assuming we adopted all levels proposed):
FATAL > ERROR > WARN > CONFIG > INFO > VERBOSE > DEBUG > FINE > TRACE. CONFIG would map to INFO for slf4j. VERBOSE and FINE would both map to DEBUG. My motivation for FINE was similar to your motivation for VERBOSE: DEBUG isn't quite enough. In retrospect, I agree more with you that something is needed more on the INFO side of DEBUG rather than the TRACE side. That would allow DEBUG to be used for what it's really meant for. So I'm fine with VERBOSE instead. My reason for putting CONFIG between INFO and WARN is simple: I ALWAYS want to see config-related messages when the application starts, but I don't always want to see INFO messages after it starts. And if something re-configures while the application is running, I want to see that, too. I've developed the habit of logging startup messages as WARNings, which I don't like doing. Hope that helps some. Nick Sent from my iPhone from the Las Vegas airport, so please forgive brief replies and frequent typos > On Jan 18, 2014, at 11:21, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > STEP? No clue what that means. > > Gary, if you want to implement VERBOSE between INFO and DEBUG I’m OK with > that, but what will that map to in SLF4J, etc. DEBUG? > > And yes, something on the web site should document our recommended usage for > levels and markers. > > Ralph > > >> On Jan 18, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Ah, my view of VERBOSE is that it is _more_ information, hence INFO < >> VERBOSE < DEBUG; while it sounds like Ralphs sees it as more DEBUG data. >> >> For me DEBUG data is going to be already verbose, even more than 'verbose'. >> >> What is interesting (to me) is that DEBUG is often misused based on this >> basic mix: debug messages can be for users *and/or* for developers, there is >> no distinction in the audience. >> >> For example, as a user, I want to get data to help me debug my configuration >> and my process. As a developer, I want to debug the code. These can be two >> very different set of data. >> >> But we do not have DEBUG_USER and DEBUG_DEV levels. I would see INFO next to >> VERBOSE as useful to users. Then DEBUG and TRACE useful for developers. Each >> app can have its convention of course, but it would be nice to have the >> distinction available through levels for developers to use. >> >> I see TRACE as method entry and exit type of logging, *very* *low* level >> stuff. >> >> We could also have both (ducking for projectiles): >> >> INFO >> VERBOSE >> DEBUG >> STEP >> TRACE >> >> Gary >> >> >>> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >>> wrote: >>> Oops. I just noticed you proposed that VERBOSE be between INFO and DEBUG. >>> Now that I don’t understand. My experience is that VERBOSE is usually more >>> detailed than debug messages, not less. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>>> On Jan 18, 2014, at 9:44 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I understand the need for CONFIG. However it isn’t clear to me whether it >>>> belongs between INFO and WARN or DEBUG and INFO. That is because it >>>> typically would be used to log configuration during startup. That doesn’t >>>> necessarily imply that you would then want to see all INFO messages as >>>> well. Due to that, it would make more sense to me to make a CONFIG marker. >>>> >>>> I don’t really understand the point of FINE or FINER. >>>> >>>> On the other hand, VERBOSE does make a bit more sense, but I’m struggling >>>> with how that is any different than TRACE. I guess the idea is that TRACE >>>> is for control flow (entry, exit) and VERBOSE is for more detailed debug >>>> messages? I suppose I can go along with that argument, but again one >>>> could just as easily create a VERBOSE marker and attach it to either TRACE >>>> or DEBUG. I guess I wouldn’t object if VERBOSE was added as a Level but >>>> I’m not really convinced it is necessary either. >>>> >>>> Ralph >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 18, 2014, at 7:08 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I've always liked Ralph's argument that Markers give users much more >>>>> flexibility than any predefined Levels. >>>>> I would prefer to stick to the log4j/slf4j level names. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Interesting, I have been wanting a VERBOSE level better INFO and DEBUG. >>>>>> >>>>>> See >>>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/logging-log4j-dev/201310.mbox/%3CCACZkXPxNwYbn__CbXUqFhC7e3Q=kee94j+udhe8+6jiubcz...@mail.gmail.com%3E >>>>>> >>>>>> You'll have to dig a little in that ref to find my proposal, sorry I'm >>>>>> on my phone ATM. >>>>>> >>>>>> It sounds like we see logging configuration messages differently though. >>>>>> I do not like the name CONFIG because it does not sound like a level to >>>>>> me. Otoh, many command lines have a verbose AND a debug switch. So it >>>>>> makes sense to me too have corresponding levels. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gary >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>> From: Nick Williams >>>>>> Date:01/17/2014 23:50 (GMT-05:00) >>>>>> To: Log4J Developers List >>>>>> Subject: Web Issues, Logging Levels, and GA >>>>>> >>>>>> Wanted to update y'all. As you know, I've been very absent lately due to >>>>>> the book consuming every minute of my free time. I know I haven't been >>>>>> contributing my due, and for that please accept my sincerest apologies. >>>>>> The book is finally done (goes on sale next month!) and I can get back >>>>>> to regular life. I'm going to be out of town for the next week on a >>>>>> much-needed vacation with very limited access to email. I'll be back the >>>>>> weekend of January 25-26, and that weekend I will be spending almost the >>>>>> entire time finally dealing with the 8-10 web application-related bugs. >>>>>> After that, I don't see any encumbrances to releasing 2.0.0.GA. >>>>>> >>>>>> Except... >>>>>> >>>>>> Logging Levels. We kinda-sorta talked about this a few months ago, and a >>>>>> few months before that, and a few months before that, but we never >>>>>> actually DID anything about it. It's clear by now that my "extendable >>>>>> enum" proposal (that would be a drop-in replacement for and binary >>>>>> compatible with the current Level enum) is not going to be accepted. >>>>>> Absent any other proposals, I suggest we add the following new levels >>>>>> before GA: >>>>>> >>>>>> CONFIG - Between INFO and WARN, mapped to INFO for bridges to other >>>>>> frameworks that don't have an equivalent level >>>>>> >>>>>> FINE - Between DEBUG and TRACE, mapped to TRACE for bridges to other >>>>>> frameworks that don't have an equivalent level >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll let y'all chat about that over the next week. ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Be back soon, >>>>>> >>>>>> Nick >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org >> >> >> >> -- >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition >> Spring Batch in Action >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >
