Release criteria proposal: logging

James Laska jlaska at
Mon May 16 20:47:55 UTC 2011

On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 13:44 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I know there's a bit of a backlog of proposed criteria changes I really
> should look at, but wanted to write this one down before it escapes. Per
> the thread 'Syslog not running?', I'd like to propose the following
> Alpha criterion for future releases:
> * A system logging infrastructure must be available, enabled by default,
> and must work as intended, and in accordance with relevant standards
> accepted by the Project
> (Improvements to the wording welcome, I'm trying to keep it from going
> stale by not specifying particular logger implementations or file
> locations)

ACK! :)  

My usual concerns about encompassing too much ... should we elaborate on
"working as intended"?  Clearly we are interested in whether it works in
the most basic sense ... not if remote logging a select set of messages
to another system fails (or is that included too)?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : 

More information about the test mailing list