[Python-Dev] Loggers in the stdlib and logging configuration APIs (original) (raw)

Vinay Sajip vinay_sajip at yahoo.co.uk
Tue Dec 28 09:19:45 CET 2010

Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan gmail.com> writes:

Unfortunately, the "py" package already claimed that namespace, so it isn't really free for us to use in the standard library (even the current "py.warnings" for redirected warnings may be misleading, as it may give users the impression that package is involved somewhere along

Gosh, I had no idea the py package even existed.

the line). It is probably best just to go with the "name" convention and not worry about being able to draw a clean distinction between "standard library" and "third party" (that distinction doesn't exist in the module heirarchy, so it isn't really reasonable to expect it to exist in the logging heirarchy).

True.

However, rather than a manually maintained list of low level loggers, it may be feasible to just have a flag we can set on loggers that makes them immune to the default implicit disabling. Then the config

Yes, I thought about this option after I posted, using "leave_enabled" as the attribute name, as well as possibly an API to register loggers for being skipped by the disable logic. A logger flag is definitely easier all round.

calls can support three levels of logger disabling: - leave all existing loggers enabled (existing option)

I think you mean disabled - that's the current behaviour.

- leave only flagged loggers enabled (new default behaviour) - disable all loggers not mentioned explicitly (new option)

So far, this seems the best approach.

Thanks,

Vinay Sajip

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list