PEP 282 Implementation

[vsajip]

BPO	578494
Nosy	@gvanrossum, @mhammond, @vsajip
Files	logging-0.4.6.tar.gz: Entire distribution of logging module logging.py: The logging module itself (V0.4.6) logging.tar.gz: Refactored module as a package (interim release)

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = 'https://github.com/gvanrossum'
closed_at = <Date 2002-11-13.16:23:05.000>
created_at = <Date 2002-07-08.00:50:41.000>
labels = ['library']
title = 'PEP 282 Implementation'
updated_at = <Date 2002-11-13.16:23:05.000>
user = 'https://github.com/vsajip'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2002-11-13.16:23:05.000>
actor = 'gvanrossum'
assignee = 'gvanrossum'
closed = True
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2002-07-08.00:50:41.000>
creator = 'vinay.sajip'
dependencies = []
files = ['4409', '4410', '4411']
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 578494
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 6.0
messages = ['40513', '40514', '40515', '40516', '40517', '40518']
nosy_count = 3.0
nosy_names = ['gvanrossum', 'mhammond', 'vinay.sajip']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'accepted'
stage = None
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = None
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue578494'
versions = ['Python 2.3']

[vsajip]

The attached file implements PEP-282. The file logging-
0.4.6.tar.gz is the entire distribution including
setup/install, test/example scripts, and TeX
documentation. The file logging.py (within the .tar.gz) is
all that is needed to implement the PEP.

[vsajip]

Logged In: YES
user_id=308438

Added just the logging.py file to make it easier to review.

[mhammond]

Logged In: YES
user_id=14198

The code seems high quality and well documented. I have no
concerns with logging.py as such.

I have two main issues:

• Design decisions: looking over python-dev, I can not see
  a consensus on the design decisions. I believe that *some*
  type of official acceptance of the design should be decreed
  by someone.

• Source structure: while this seems quite suitable for an
  extension module, the format of the patch is probably not
  quite correct for a core module. For example, the test code
  should probably be integrated with the standard Python test
  suite (even if in a sub-directory), the Tex docs integrated
  with Python's docs etc

So while I think the patch is high quality I believe these
issues need to be addressed before I can do much more.

Setting to "pending" - but good stuff tho! Please drive
this through!

[gvanrossum]

Logged In: YES
user_id=6380

Um, Mark, looks like you accidentally closed this!

I reopened it and assigned it to me for review. I'm gonna
read the PEP and see if I like the design decisions enough
to pronounce acceptance.

[vsajip]

Logged In: YES
user_id=308438

The logging.tar.gz is an in-between-releases version which I
have uploaded for GvR review. It contains the logging module
refactored as a package. __init__.py contains the core
including FileHandler and StreamHandler; handlers.py
contains all the other handlers; and config.py contains the file-
based config stuff.

[gvanrossum]

Logged In: YES
user_id=6380

I've checked this into the Pythonm CVS tree now.

I expect to be tweaking it some before the 2.3a1 release.

There's no documentation checked in yet; I hope someone will
convert the docs at
http://www.red-dove.com/python_logging.html to LaTeX.

Vinaj, if you have any bug fixes, let me know!