Thats what I was thinking Chad. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Log4NET User" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 3:34 PM Subject: RE: Dyanmic Levels.
Wouldn't it make sense to allow people to specify custom levels or redefine existing ones in the config file? This seems to fit in with the overall philosophy of log4net (putting most, if not all the power of logging into the admin/configure-person's hands). Thoughts? -Chad -----Original Message----- From: Hollywood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:37 PM To: Log4NET User Subject: Re: Dyanmic Levels. > What changes would you envision making? Especially what would you be > changing more than once? Well, any changes I make to the Log4net code needs to be updated when the next beta build comes along. But anyways, in the way things work here, we'd really like to see the INFO level being second lowest after ALL. There are some things we like to spit out to the log as information only even when the log is set to only spit our ERROR levels. Another example is having TRACE lower level than DEBUG. > New levels can be created without modifying the log4net code using the > public Level constructor. Levels do not have to be declared in the Level > class. Any level object can be passed to the Ilogger.Log method. In order > for a level name to be known when reading the configuration file the level > must be in the ILoggerRepository.LevelMap. Well I really don't need to be creating new levels entirely, as noted there is quite the collection of levels already defined.
