Re: libsvn_repos logging -- rethunk

On Sat, 2005-07-16 at 09:12 -0400, John Peacock wrote:
> I'm depressed that I am, to date, unable to articulate to anyone else why I
> think this design is too limited in scope.

That's partly because:

  * You described your proposed log object as opaque, but then gave it
an exposed field, which is confusing. Your clarification in
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-07/0642.shtml only confused me
further, by referring to the log object (apparently) as a "baton" and
simply reiterating that it had an exposed field, despite being "opaque".

  * You assert that your new design will allow other kinds of logging
without any effect on the caller, but don't say how you expect that to
be configured. In Ben's proposed API, logging is configured by the
caller, which means the available kinds of logging have to be exposed in
the API.

I'm not necessarily opposed to your proposal (in fact, it bugs me that
Ben's proposal add functionality using the svn_repos_t object which
doesn't interact with a repository in any way that I can tell), but I
certainly don't understand it.

> I'm also not clear why I am unable to describe my reasoning behind the use of a
> structured log object.

What's a "structured" object?

> 1) each library would be capable of having a dedicated log file, or not, with a
> different "global" log level or not;

Exposing our library divisions to the user would not be a feature.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Jul 17 00:48:00 2005