New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Logging facilities listed twice for twice the confusion #240
Labels
Comments
ZenGround0
added
kind/bug
A bug in existing code (including security flaws)
exp/novice
Someone with a little familiarity can pick up
help wanted
Seeking public contribution on this issue
P3
Low: Not priority right now
status/ready
Ready to be worked
labels
Nov 15, 2017
actually one is internal and used for controlling the output during testing and the other one is more user-facing. I would have to think if consolidating both has a downside in this regard. |
ZenGround0
added
exp/intermediate
Prior experience is likely helpful
and removed
kind/bug
A bug in existing code (including security flaws)
exp/novice
Someone with a little familiarity can pick up
help wanted
Seeking public contribution on this issue
labels
Nov 15, 2017
hsanjuan
added
status/in-progress
In progress
and removed
status/ready
Ready to be worked
labels
Jan 11, 2018
hsanjuan
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 11, 2018
This puts some sanity in this. It's not super correct (name of facilities depend of the component and the main cluster component should not hard code them), but it's clear enough. Imho, better than over-engineering a more elegant approach. License: MIT Signed-off-by: Hector Sanjuan <code@hector.link>
hsanjuan
added
need/review
Needs a review
and removed
status/in-progress
In progress
labels
Jan 11, 2018
hsanjuan
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 15, 2018
This puts some sanity in this. It's not super correct (name of facilities depend of the component and the main cluster component should not hard code them), but it's clear enough. Imho, better than over-engineering a more elegant approach. License: MIT Signed-off-by: Hector Sanjuan <code@hector.link>
hsanjuan
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 15, 2018
License: MIT Signed-off-by: Hector Sanjuan <code@hector.link>
hsanjuan
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 15, 2018
License: MIT Signed-off-by: Hector Sanjuan <code@hector.link>
hsanjuan
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 16, 2018
License: MIT Signed-off-by: Hector Sanjuan <code@hector.link>
hsanjuan
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 16, 2018
Fix #240: Avoid duplicated list of facilities
Closed
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
It took me too long to figure out why I was not seeing log output after adding a new facility in logging.go. Turns out there is another list of facilities in ipfs-cluster-service/main.go that only applies in the case the debug flag is not passed in. The two lists should be consolidated so that facilities need to be added only once. This should be a pretty quick fix.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: