Thanks, I see. :-) On Tue, 2014-04-08 at 10:23 -0500, Ben Nemec wrote: > On 04/07/2014 11:57 PM, Peng Wu wrote: > > Thanks for the comments. > > Maybe we could just search the English log. :-) > > Right, but the problem is that the English log is not guaranteed to > remain the same. An (extremely contrived) example: > > Say we have a log message like "Failed to not find entity: %s" > > That's really confusing because of the double negative. So we change it > to "Found an unexpected entity: %s". It's highly unlikely that a search > for the changed message is going to also turn up a blog post or whatever > about the first message. > > Granted the example is contrived, but I've seen just that sort of log > message rewording done in real changes too. > > Maybe the dual logging is enough for everyone, but I don't think it > addresses all of the reasons for wanting message ids so I don't think we > can just say we're not going to do message ids because of it. It's > perfectly valid to say we're not going to do message ids because no one > wants them enough to actually implement them though. :-) > > > > > But I just find it is hard to meet all requirements of log message id, > > Just some thought that we can avoid the message id generation by using > > the English log. > > For debug purpose, we can just read the English log. > > > > Regards, > > Peng Wu > > > > On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 11:19 -0500, Ben Nemec wrote: > >> On 04/03/2014 10:19 PM, Peng Wu wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Recently I read the "Separate translation domain for log messages" > >>> blueprint[1], and I found that we can store both English Message Log and > >>> Translated Message Log with some configurations. > >>> > >>> I am an i18n Software Engineer, and we are thinking about "Add message > >>> IDs for log messages" blueprint[2]. My thought is that if we can store > >>> both English Message Log and Translated Message Log, we can skip the > >>> need of Log Message ID Generation. > >>> > >>> I also commented the "Add message IDs for log messages" blueprint[2]. > >>> > >>> If the servers always store English Log Messages, maybe we don't need > >>> the "Add message IDs for log messages" blueprint[2] any more. > >>> > >>> Feel free to comment this proposal. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Peng Wu > >>> > >>> Refer URL: > >>> [1] > >>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/+spec/log-messages-translation-domain > >>> [2] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/+spec/log-messages-id > >> > >> As I recall, there were more reasons for log message ids than just i18n > >> issues. There's also the fact that an error message might change > >> significantly from one release to another, but if it's still addressing > >> the same issue then the message id could be left alone so searching for > >> it would still return relevant results, regardless of the release. > >> > >> That said, I don't know if anyone is actually working on the message id > >> blueprint so I'm not sure how much it matters at this point. :-) > >> > >> -Ben > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OpenStack-dev mailing list > >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev