Release criteria proposal: logging

[James Laska]

On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 14:03 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 16:47 -0400, James Laska wrote:
> > 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)?
> 
> No, I think basic local logging is all we're interested in. Revision:
> 
> * A system logging infrastructure must be available and enabled by
> default. It must provide at least basic local file-based logging of
> kernel messages, and allow other components to write log messages. This
> must be done in accordance with relevant standards accepted by the
> Project
> 
> better?

Very nice, better than anything I could think of.

Thanks,
James

-------------- 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 : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/attachments/20110517/90ff66dd/attachment.bin