rafaelweingartner commented on issue #2992: PoC for log library surface
reduction (2991)
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2992#issuecomment-458587891
@DaanHoogland on a second thought. Feel free to do what you would like here
;)
I think I gave a -1, but I will not be a
rafaelweingartner commented on issue #2992: PoC for log library surface
reduction (2991)
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2992#issuecomment-458522967
I do know you are not asking my help ;)
The part I disagree with is the method used to do the so called "reduction
of t
rafaelweingartner commented on issue #2992: PoC for log library surface
reduction (2991)
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2992#issuecomment-458504854
@DaanHoogland I have not had free time to work on these things lately. I
also do not see the benefits of this PR.
But,
rafaelweingartner commented on issue #2992: PoC for log library surface
reduction (2991)
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2992#issuecomment-439860129
Sure I will
This is an automated message from the Apache Git
rafaelweingartner commented on issue #2992: PoC for log library surface
reduction (2991)
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2992#issuecomment-439380086
> If you unify the log framework usage as well, I am open to your solution.
That is actually what I am doing. That is why it
rafaelweingartner commented on issue #2992: PoC for log library surface
reduction (2991)
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2992#issuecomment-439359447
> Also, @rafaelweingartner, I will -1 a PR that 'just' upgrades a
structurally changed dependency, if it fails to makes effort
rafaelweingartner commented on issue #2992: PoC for log library surface
reduction (2991)
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2992#issuecomment-438705466
I understand that is not a feature, but I do not agree that this will help.
I will try to write something until tomorrow to ex
