Where is the error.log gone?
Locked
12345
12345
Re: Where is the error.log gone?
 
|
The timing of when an opinion is expressed in a posting should be
considered of a lesser importance than the arguments in such postings. Given that your viewpoint only supports your personal case, makes me wonder whether you have the best interest of other community members and users at heart. Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> wrote: > Having an error.log OOTB, for sure, doens't have a negative impact on you. > > Pierre Smits > > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* > Services & Solutions for Cloud- > Based Manufacturing, Professional > Services and Retail & Trade > http://www.orrtiz.com > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Scott Gray <[hidden email]> > wrote: > >> Everyone? So far we only have Jacques. Well and you I guess, but that's >> debatable considering you only just decided yesterday to form a strong >> opinion so I have my doubts about it having a negative impact for you. >> >> Regards >> Scott >> >> On 15/09/2014, at 10:14 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> > Why *force* EVERYONE not to have an error log OOTB? Why *force* >> EVERYONE to >> > spend time and money to get it back in? >> > >> > Pierre Smits >> > >> > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >> > Services & Solutions for Cloud- >> > Based Manufacturing, Professional >> > Services and Retail & Trade >> > http://www.orrtiz.com >> > >> > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Adrian Crum < >> > [hidden email]> wrote: >> > >> >> Jacques, >> >> >> >> That perspective goes both ways. From my perspective, you are trying >> >> *force* everyone to do things your way. >> >> >> >> That is why everyone is trying to get you to realize that a >> >> one-size-fits-all setting will not work - because everyone is >> different. >> >> >> >> If you want the error log on your installation, then configure it to do >> >> so. Why *force* EVERYONE to have an error log? >> >> >> >> Adrian Crum >> >> Sandglass Software >> >> www.sandglass-software.com >> >> >> >> On 9/15/2014 10:19 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> >> >> >>> Not when you want to quickly spot obvious errors that you can easily >> fix >> >>> or wait to fix later, and yes I spent my share of debugging also... >> >>> >> >>> But anyway, why do you want to *force* everybody to use the same way >> >>> than you, are you an OFBiz prophet? >> >>> >> >>> Jacques >> >>> >> >>> Le 15/09/2014 10:53, Scott Gray a écrit : >> >>> >> >>>> As someone who has spent thousands of hours debugging OFBiz >> >>>> installations I can assure you that the error.log is redundant and >> >>>> provides no true value over ofbiz.log. As I've mentioned a few times >> >>>> now, OFBiz errors are regularly worthless without knowledge of the >> >>>> context of the error which can only be found in ofbiz.log. >> >>>> >> >>>> With a few command line tools "clutter" is a total non-issue and even >> >>>> a basic knowledge of those tools is a total time saver when >> >>>> investigating log files. >> >>>> >> >>>> Regards >> >>>> Scott >> >>>> >> >>>> On 15/09/2014, at 7:43 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> On the basis that log analysis and error identification/reporting >> costs >> >>>>> money, and the more complex this process is the more it costs. >> >>>>> An error log contains less clutter and is the first point in >> >>>>> identification >> >>>>> and triage of (severe) issues in any organisation that has adopted a >> >>>>> methodology for service delivery (e.g. ITIL, ISO/IEC 20000, etc), >> >>>>> specifically the error control process (in ITIL) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Without this OOTB more time is spend on: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> - going through the other, more detailed log(s) in the various >> OFBiz >> >>>>> systems an organisation might have (e.g. dev, test, prod, etc) >> >>>>> - getting the error log back and ensuring that it stays in. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Pierre Smits >> >>>>> >> >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >> >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >> >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >> >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >> >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Scott Gray < >> [hidden email] >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On what basis? >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Regards >> >>>>>> Scott >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On 12/09/2014, at 9:44 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >> >>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> I support reverting this regression. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Pierre Smits >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >> >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >> >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >> >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >> >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Jacopo Cappellato < >> >>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Sep 12, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Jacques Le Roux < >> >>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I don't understand why you are so not open to put back the >> >>>>>>>>> error.log in >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> log4j2.xml >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Because it is just one of 1 million possible ways to configure >> >>>>>>>> logging: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> it >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> is a specific one on not a generic one and so it is not better >> >>>>>>>> than the >> >>>>>>>> other 1 million possibilities; you have explained why you like >> it but >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> me or >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> others could find similar arguments for the other millions ways; >> >>>>>>>> since >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> no >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> one seconded you in your attempt to add the configuration back >> this >> >>>>>>>> confirms to me that this specific configuration is not better >> than >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> other; >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> for this reason it should be left out of the trunk. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> and qualify this as a mess and almost myself and idiot. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I didn't say this and the mail archive can demonstrate it; you >> >>>>>>>> have been >> >>>>>>>> trying to raise the tone of the conversation since the beginning >> >>>>>>>> of this >> >>>>>>>> thread (and you did the same in at least another thread recently) >> >>>>>>>> but I >> >>>>>>>> will not start to fight with you. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Jacopo >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >> > |
Re: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
I agree the importance is in the arguments.
You have argued that *forcing* someone to configure their log settings in a production deployment places an undue burden on them. As I have pointed out, configuring log settings is standard practice - no one is being forced to do it. In fact, only a fool would run OFBiz in a production environment using the OOTB settings. So, your argument has been contrived simply for the sake of being argumentative. Clearly, your participation in this discussion is not in the best interest of the community. Adrian Crum Sandglass Software www.sandglass-software.com On 9/15/2014 12:35 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: > The timing of when an opinion is expressed in a posting should be > considered of a lesser importance than the arguments in such postings. > > Given that your viewpoint only supports your personal case, makes me wonder > whether you have the best interest of other community members and users at > heart. > > Pierre Smits > > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* > Services & Solutions for Cloud- > Based Manufacturing, Professional > Services and Retail & Trade > http://www.orrtiz.com > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> > wrote: > >> Having an error.log OOTB, for sure, doens't have a negative impact on you. >> >> Pierre Smits >> >> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >> Based Manufacturing, Professional >> Services and Retail & Trade >> http://www.orrtiz.com >> >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Scott Gray <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >> >>> Everyone? So far we only have Jacques. Well and you I guess, but that's >>> debatable considering you only just decided yesterday to form a strong >>> opinion so I have my doubts about it having a negative impact for you. >>> >>> Regards >>> Scott >>> >>> On 15/09/2014, at 10:14 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>>> Why *force* EVERYONE not to have an error log OOTB? Why *force* >>> EVERYONE to >>>> spend time and money to get it back in? >>>> >>>> Pierre Smits >>>> >>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Adrian Crum < >>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Jacques, >>>>> >>>>> That perspective goes both ways. From my perspective, you are trying >>>>> *force* everyone to do things your way. >>>>> >>>>> That is why everyone is trying to get you to realize that a >>>>> one-size-fits-all setting will not work - because everyone is >>> different. >>>>> >>>>> If you want the error log on your installation, then configure it to do >>>>> so. Why *force* EVERYONE to have an error log? >>>>> >>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>> >>>>> On 9/15/2014 10:19 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Not when you want to quickly spot obvious errors that you can easily >>> fix >>>>>> or wait to fix later, and yes I spent my share of debugging also... >>>>>> >>>>>> But anyway, why do you want to *force* everybody to use the same way >>>>>> than you, are you an OFBiz prophet? >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 15/09/2014 10:53, Scott Gray a écrit : >>>>>> >>>>>>> As someone who has spent thousands of hours debugging OFBiz >>>>>>> installations I can assure you that the error.log is redundant and >>>>>>> provides no true value over ofbiz.log. As I've mentioned a few times >>>>>>> now, OFBiz errors are regularly worthless without knowledge of the >>>>>>> context of the error which can only be found in ofbiz.log. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> With a few command line tools "clutter" is a total non-issue and even >>>>>>> a basic knowledge of those tools is a total time saver when >>>>>>> investigating log files. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15/09/2014, at 7:43 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On the basis that log analysis and error identification/reporting >>> costs >>>>>>>> money, and the more complex this process is the more it costs. >>>>>>>> An error log contains less clutter and is the first point in >>>>>>>> identification >>>>>>>> and triage of (severe) issues in any organisation that has adopted a >>>>>>>> methodology for service delivery (e.g. ITIL, ISO/IEC 20000, etc), >>>>>>>> specifically the error control process (in ITIL) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Without this OOTB more time is spend on: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - going through the other, more detailed log(s) in the various >>> OFBiz >>>>>>>> systems an organisation might have (e.g. dev, test, prod, etc) >>>>>>>> - getting the error log back and ensuring that it stays in. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Scott Gray < >>> [hidden email] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On what basis? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 12/09/2014, at 9:44 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I support reverting this regression. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Jacopo Cappellato < >>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sep 12, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand why you are so not open to put back the >>>>>>>>>>>> error.log in >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> log4j2.xml >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Because it is just one of 1 million possible ways to configure >>>>>>>>>>> logging: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> is a specific one on not a generic one and so it is not better >>>>>>>>>>> than the >>>>>>>>>>> other 1 million possibilities; you have explained why you like >>> it but >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> me or >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> others could find similar arguments for the other millions ways; >>>>>>>>>>> since >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> one seconded you in your attempt to add the configuration back >>> this >>>>>>>>>>> confirms to me that this specific configuration is not better >>> than >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> other; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> for this reason it should be left out of the trunk. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> and qualify this as a mess and almost myself and idiot. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I didn't say this and the mail archive can demonstrate it; you >>>>>>>>>>> have been >>>>>>>>>>> trying to raise the tone of the conversation since the beginning >>>>>>>>>>> of this >>>>>>>>>>> thread (and you did the same in at least another thread recently) >>>>>>>>>>> but I >>>>>>>>>>> will not start to fight with you. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >> > |
Re: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
I am not debating your point that configuring log settings is a standard
practice. I am debating the mimimum that OFBiz provides OOTB and whether that is good enough for the majority of the users. I use OFBiz in my business. I offer it as a business solution to my prospective customers, and I provide services around around OFBiz. So yes, I have a vested interest in having a solution that is easily implemented, including ease of reporting on functioning in any kind of operation setting. An OOTB error.log helps with that. Having someone to go into an extensive log file and extract from there the errors and report those is eating up more time than having the report ready. Likewise is having to configure every new instantiation to get it to the default that is needed in a business environment (and according to business needs). Having a feature set and a configuration setting that satisfies the majority is better than having one that satisfies a minority. That you hold my argument as just for the sake of argumentative, is beside the reality I am faced with. A reality that others might have as well. It seems to me that your last remark is rather intended to have me (and others) shut up about this than trying to resolve this issue. Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Adrian Crum < [hidden email]> wrote: > I agree the importance is in the arguments. > > You have argued that *forcing* someone to configure their log settings in > a production deployment places an undue burden on them. As I have pointed > out, configuring log settings is standard practice - no one is being forced > to do it. In fact, only a fool would run OFBiz in a production environment > using the OOTB settings. > > So, your argument has been contrived simply for the sake of being > argumentative. Clearly, your participation in this discussion is not in the > best interest of the community. > > Adrian Crum > Sandglass Software > www.sandglass-software.com > > On 9/15/2014 12:35 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: > >> The timing of when an opinion is expressed in a posting should be >> considered of a lesser importance than the arguments in such postings. >> >> Given that your viewpoint only supports your personal case, makes me >> wonder >> whether you have the best interest of other community members and users at >> heart. >> >> Pierre Smits >> >> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >> Based Manufacturing, Professional >> Services and Retail & Trade >> http://www.orrtiz.com >> >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >> >> Having an error.log OOTB, for sure, doens't have a negative impact on >>> you. >>> >>> Pierre Smits >>> >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>> Services and Retail & Trade >>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Scott Gray <[hidden email] >>> > >>> wrote: >>> >>> Everyone? So far we only have Jacques. Well and you I guess, but >>>> that's >>>> debatable considering you only just decided yesterday to form a strong >>>> opinion so I have my doubts about it having a negative impact for you. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> On 15/09/2014, at 10:14 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Why *force* EVERYONE not to have an error log OOTB? Why *force* >>>>> >>>> EVERYONE to >>>> >>>>> spend time and money to get it back in? >>>>> >>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>> >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Adrian Crum < >>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Jacques, >>>>>> >>>>>> That perspective goes both ways. From my perspective, you are trying >>>>>> *force* everyone to do things your way. >>>>>> >>>>>> That is why everyone is trying to get you to realize that a >>>>>> one-size-fits-all setting will not work - because everyone is >>>>>> >>>>> different. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> If you want the error log on your installation, then configure it to >>>>>> do >>>>>> so. Why *force* EVERYONE to have an error log? >>>>>> >>>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>>> >>>>>> On 9/15/2014 10:19 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Not when you want to quickly spot obvious errors that you can easily >>>>>>> >>>>>> fix >>>> >>>>> or wait to fix later, and yes I spent my share of debugging also... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But anyway, why do you want to *force* everybody to use the same way >>>>>>> than you, are you an OFBiz prophet? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Le 15/09/2014 10:53, Scott Gray a écrit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As someone who has spent thousands of hours debugging OFBiz >>>>>>>> installations I can assure you that the error.log is redundant and >>>>>>>> provides no true value over ofbiz.log. As I've mentioned a few >>>>>>>> times >>>>>>>> now, OFBiz errors are regularly worthless without knowledge of the >>>>>>>> context of the error which can only be found in ofbiz.log. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> With a few command line tools "clutter" is a total non-issue and >>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>> a basic knowledge of those tools is a total time saver when >>>>>>>> investigating log files. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 15/09/2014, at 7:43 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> On the basis that log analysis and error identification/reporting >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> costs >>>> >>>>> money, and the more complex this process is the more it costs. >>>>>>>>> An error log contains less clutter and is the first point in >>>>>>>>> identification >>>>>>>>> and triage of (severe) issues in any organisation that has adopted >>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> methodology for service delivery (e.g. ITIL, ISO/IEC 20000, etc), >>>>>>>>> specifically the error control process (in ITIL) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Without this OOTB more time is spend on: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - going through the other, more detailed log(s) in the various >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> OFBiz >>>> >>>>> systems an organisation might have (e.g. dev, test, prod, etc) >>>>>>>>> - getting the error log back and ensuring that it stays in. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Scott Gray < >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [hidden email] >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On what basis? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 12/09/2014, at 9:44 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I support reverting this regression. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Jacopo Cappellato < >>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 12, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand why you are so not open to put back the >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> error.log in >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> log4j2.xml >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Because it is just one of 1 million possible ways to configure >>>>>>>>>>>> logging: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> is a specific one on not a generic one and so it is not better >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> than the >>>>>>>>>>>> other 1 million possibilities; you have explained why you like >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> it but >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> me or >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> others could find similar arguments for the other millions ways; >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> since >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> one seconded you in your attempt to add the configuration back >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> this >>>> >>>>> confirms to me that this specific configuration is not better >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> than >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> other; >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> for this reason it should be left out of the trunk. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and qualify this as a mess and almost myself and idiot. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't say this and the mail archive can demonstrate it; you >>>>>>>>>>>> have been >>>>>>>>>>>> trying to raise the tone of the conversation since the beginning >>>>>>>>>>>> of this >>>>>>>>>>>> thread (and you did the same in at least another thread >>>>>>>>>>>> recently) >>>>>>>>>>>> but I >>>>>>>>>>>> will not start to fight with you. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> |
Re: Where is the error.log gone?
|
In reply to this post by Adrian Crum-3
And in finaly, why not just adding this :
Index: framework/base/config/log4j2.xml =================================================================== --- framework/base/config/log4j2.xml (révision 1625001) +++ framework/base/config/log4j2.xml (copie de travail) @@ -1,4 +1,8 @@ <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> +<!-- This file contains few configuration and make more your self your are a super man ! + If isn't the case, for more configuration as example, see https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/AnotherBetterWayToConfigureLog4j2 + Or use the web like http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/configuration.html +--> <Configuration monitorInterval="60"> <Appenders> <Console name="stdout" target="SYSTEM_OUT"> Le 15/09/2014 12:09, Adrian Crum a écrit : > Jacques, > > That perspective goes both ways. From my perspective, you are trying > *force* everyone to do things your way. > > That is why everyone is trying to get you to realize that a > one-size-fits-all setting will not work - because everyone is different. > > If you want the error log on your installation, then configure it to > do so. Why *force* EVERYONE to have an error log? > > Adrian Crum > Sandglass Software > www.sandglass-software.com > > On 9/15/2014 10:19 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> Not when you want to quickly spot obvious errors that you can easily fix >> or wait to fix later, and yes I spent my share of debugging also... >> >> But anyway, why do you want to *force* everybody to use the same way >> than you, are you an OFBiz prophet? >> >> Jacques >> >> Le 15/09/2014 10:53, Scott Gray a écrit : >>> As someone who has spent thousands of hours debugging OFBiz >>> installations I can assure you that the error.log is redundant and >>> provides no true value over ofbiz.log. As I've mentioned a few times >>> now, OFBiz errors are regularly worthless without knowledge of the >>> context of the error which can only be found in ofbiz.log. >>> >>> With a few command line tools "clutter" is a total non-issue and even >>> a basic knowledge of those tools is a total time saver when >>> investigating log files. >>> >>> Regards >>> Scott >>> >>> On 15/09/2014, at 7:43 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>>> On the basis that log analysis and error identification/reporting >>>> costs >>>> money, and the more complex this process is the more it costs. >>>> An error log contains less clutter and is the first point in >>>> identification >>>> and triage of (severe) issues in any organisation that has adopted a >>>> methodology for service delivery (e.g. ITIL, ISO/IEC 20000, etc), >>>> specifically the error control process (in ITIL) >>>> >>>> Without this OOTB more time is spend on: >>>> >>>> - going through the other, more detailed log(s) in the various >>>> OFBiz >>>> systems an organisation might have (e.g. dev, test, prod, etc) >>>> - getting the error log back and ensuring that it stays in. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Pierre Smits >>>> >>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Scott Gray >>>> <[hidden email]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On what basis? >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Scott >>>>> >>>>> On 12/09/2014, at 9:44 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I support reverting this regression. >>>>>> >>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>> >>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Jacopo Cappellato < >>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sep 12, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't understand why you are so not open to put back the >>>>>>>> error.log in >>>>>>> log4j2.xml >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because it is just one of 1 million possible ways to configure >>>>>>> logging: >>>>> it >>>>>>> is a specific one on not a generic one and so it is not better >>>>>>> than the >>>>>>> other 1 million possibilities; you have explained why you like >>>>>>> it but >>>>> me or >>>>>>> others could find similar arguments for the other millions ways; >>>>>>> since >>>>> no >>>>>>> one seconded you in your attempt to add the configuration back this >>>>>>> confirms to me that this specific configuration is not better than >>>>> other; >>>>>>> for this reason it should be left out of the trunk. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and qualify this as a mess and almost myself and idiot. >>>>>>> I didn't say this and the mail archive can demonstrate it; you >>>>>>> have been >>>>>>> trying to raise the tone of the conversation since the beginning >>>>>>> of this >>>>>>> thread (and you did the same in at least another thread recently) >>>>>>> but I >>>>>>> will not start to fight with you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> |
Re: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
In reply to this post by Pierre Smits
The issue has been resolved, so yes - I am trying to get you to shut up
about it. If you spent half as much time creating a configuration patch as you did making your silly pointless arguments, then your customers and sysadmins would have the log configurations they need. Adrian Crum Sandglass Software www.sandglass-software.com On 9/15/2014 1:17 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: > I am not debating your point that configuring log settings is a standard > practice. I am debating the mimimum that OFBiz provides OOTB and whether > that is good enough for the majority of the users. > > I use OFBiz in my business. I offer it as a business solution to my > prospective customers, and I provide services around around OFBiz. > So yes, I have a vested interest in having a solution that is easily > implemented, including ease of reporting on functioning in any kind of > operation setting. An OOTB error.log helps with that. Having someone to go > into an extensive log file and extract from there the errors and report > those is eating up more time than having the report ready. Likewise is > having to configure every new instantiation to get it to the default that > is needed in a business environment (and according to business needs). > Having a feature set and a configuration setting that satisfies the > majority is better than having one that satisfies a minority. > > That you hold my argument as just for the sake of argumentative, is beside > the reality I am faced with. A reality that others might have as well. It > seems to me that your last remark is rather intended to have me (and > others) shut up about this than trying to resolve this issue. > > Pierre Smits > > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* > Services & Solutions for Cloud- > Based Manufacturing, Professional > Services and Retail & Trade > http://www.orrtiz.com > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Adrian Crum < > [hidden email]> wrote: > >> I agree the importance is in the arguments. >> >> You have argued that *forcing* someone to configure their log settings in >> a production deployment places an undue burden on them. As I have pointed >> out, configuring log settings is standard practice - no one is being forced >> to do it. In fact, only a fool would run OFBiz in a production environment >> using the OOTB settings. >> >> So, your argument has been contrived simply for the sake of being >> argumentative. Clearly, your participation in this discussion is not in the >> best interest of the community. >> >> Adrian Crum >> Sandglass Software >> www.sandglass-software.com >> >> On 9/15/2014 12:35 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: >> >>> The timing of when an opinion is expressed in a posting should be >>> considered of a lesser importance than the arguments in such postings. >>> >>> Given that your viewpoint only supports your personal case, makes me >>> wonder >>> whether you have the best interest of other community members and users at >>> heart. >>> >>> Pierre Smits >>> >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>> Services and Retail & Trade >>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Having an error.log OOTB, for sure, doens't have a negative impact on >>>> you. >>>> >>>> Pierre Smits >>>> >>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Scott Gray <[hidden email] >>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Everyone? So far we only have Jacques. Well and you I guess, but >>>>> that's >>>>> debatable considering you only just decided yesterday to form a strong >>>>> opinion so I have my doubts about it having a negative impact for you. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Scott >>>>> >>>>> On 15/09/2014, at 10:14 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Why *force* EVERYONE not to have an error log OOTB? Why *force* >>>>>> >>>>> EVERYONE to >>>>> >>>>>> spend time and money to get it back in? >>>>>> >>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>> >>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Adrian Crum < >>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That perspective goes both ways. From my perspective, you are trying >>>>>>> *force* everyone to do things your way. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is why everyone is trying to get you to realize that a >>>>>>> one-size-fits-all setting will not work - because everyone is >>>>>>> >>>>>> different. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> If you want the error log on your installation, then configure it to >>>>>>> do >>>>>>> so. Why *force* EVERYONE to have an error log? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 9/15/2014 10:19 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not when you want to quickly spot obvious errors that you can easily >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> fix >>>>> >>>>>> or wait to fix later, and yes I spent my share of debugging also... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But anyway, why do you want to *force* everybody to use the same way >>>>>>>> than you, are you an OFBiz prophet? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Le 15/09/2014 10:53, Scott Gray a écrit : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As someone who has spent thousands of hours debugging OFBiz >>>>>>>>> installations I can assure you that the error.log is redundant and >>>>>>>>> provides no true value over ofbiz.log. As I've mentioned a few >>>>>>>>> times >>>>>>>>> now, OFBiz errors are regularly worthless without knowledge of the >>>>>>>>> context of the error which can only be found in ofbiz.log. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> With a few command line tools "clutter" is a total non-issue and >>>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>>> a basic knowledge of those tools is a total time saver when >>>>>>>>> investigating log files. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 15/09/2014, at 7:43 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On the basis that log analysis and error identification/reporting >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> costs >>>>> >>>>>> money, and the more complex this process is the more it costs. >>>>>>>>>> An error log contains less clutter and is the first point in >>>>>>>>>> identification >>>>>>>>>> and triage of (severe) issues in any organisation that has adopted >>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>> methodology for service delivery (e.g. ITIL, ISO/IEC 20000, etc), >>>>>>>>>> specifically the error control process (in ITIL) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Without this OOTB more time is spend on: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - going through the other, more detailed log(s) in the various >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> OFBiz >>>>> >>>>>> systems an organisation might have (e.g. dev, test, prod, etc) >>>>>>>>>> - getting the error log back and ensuring that it stays in. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Scott Gray < >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On what basis? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 12/09/2014, at 9:44 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I support reverting this regression. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Jacopo Cappellato < >>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 12, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand why you are so not open to put back the >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> error.log in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> log4j2.xml >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it is just one of 1 million possible ways to configure >>>>>>>>>>>>> logging: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> is a specific one on not a generic one and so it is not better >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> than the >>>>>>>>>>>>> other 1 million possibilities; you have explained why you like >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> it but >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> me or >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> others could find similar arguments for the other millions ways; >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> since >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> one seconded you in your attempt to add the configuration back >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> this >>>>> >>>>>> confirms to me that this specific configuration is not better >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> than >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> other; >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> for this reason it should be left out of the trunk. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and qualify this as a mess and almost myself and idiot. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't say this and the mail archive can demonstrate it; you >>>>>>>>>>>>> have been >>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to raise the tone of the conversation since the beginning >>>>>>>>>>>>> of this >>>>>>>>>>>>> thread (and you did the same in at least another thread >>>>>>>>>>>>> recently) >>>>>>>>>>>>> but I >>>>>>>>>>>>> will not start to fight with you. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> > |
Re: Where is the error.log gone?
Administrator
|
Le 15/09/2014 14:29, Adrian Crum a écrit : > The issue has been resolved, so yes - I am trying to get you to shut up about it. I guess you speak about OFBIZ-5287. Then I have just reopened and assigned it to myself. My plan is to propose and alternative log4j2.xml with some inline comments (never hurt if maintained) and to put back error.log. This is in a patch submitted at OFBIZ-5287. Then I will to ask users (on user ML) to vote for putting back the error.log or not. This is called democracy and majority will tell us. I have not much hope, but I want to try. Jacques > > If you spent half as much time creating a configuration patch as you did making your silly pointless arguments, then your customers and sysadmins > would have the log configurations they need. > > Adrian Crum > Sandglass Software > www.sandglass-software.com > > On 9/15/2014 1:17 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: >> I am not debating your point that configuring log settings is a standard >> practice. I am debating the mimimum that OFBiz provides OOTB and whether >> that is good enough for the majority of the users. >> >> I use OFBiz in my business. I offer it as a business solution to my >> prospective customers, and I provide services around around OFBiz. >> So yes, I have a vested interest in having a solution that is easily >> implemented, including ease of reporting on functioning in any kind of >> operation setting. An OOTB error.log helps with that. Having someone to go >> into an extensive log file and extract from there the errors and report >> those is eating up more time than having the report ready. Likewise is >> having to configure every new instantiation to get it to the default that >> is needed in a business environment (and according to business needs). >> Having a feature set and a configuration setting that satisfies the >> majority is better than having one that satisfies a minority. >> >> That you hold my argument as just for the sake of argumentative, is beside >> the reality I am faced with. A reality that others might have as well. It >> seems to me that your last remark is rather intended to have me (and >> others) shut up about this than trying to resolve this issue. >> >> Pierre Smits >> >> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >> Based Manufacturing, Professional >> Services and Retail & Trade >> http://www.orrtiz.com >> >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Adrian Crum < >> [hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> I agree the importance is in the arguments. >>> >>> You have argued that *forcing* someone to configure their log settings in >>> a production deployment places an undue burden on them. As I have pointed >>> out, configuring log settings is standard practice - no one is being forced >>> to do it. In fact, only a fool would run OFBiz in a production environment >>> using the OOTB settings. >>> >>> So, your argument has been contrived simply for the sake of being >>> argumentative. Clearly, your participation in this discussion is not in the >>> best interest of the community. >>> >>> Adrian Crum >>> Sandglass Software >>> www.sandglass-software.com >>> >>> On 9/15/2014 12:35 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>> >>>> The timing of when an opinion is expressed in a posting should be >>>> considered of a lesser importance than the arguments in such postings. >>>> >>>> Given that your viewpoint only supports your personal case, makes me >>>> wonder >>>> whether you have the best interest of other community members and users at >>>> heart. >>>> >>>> Pierre Smits >>>> >>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Having an error.log OOTB, for sure, doens't have a negative impact on >>>>> you. >>>>> >>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>> >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Scott Gray <[hidden email] >>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Everyone? So far we only have Jacques. Well and you I guess, but >>>>>> that's >>>>>> debatable considering you only just decided yesterday to form a strong >>>>>> opinion so I have my doubts about it having a negative impact for you. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Scott >>>>>> >>>>>> On 15/09/2014, at 10:14 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Why *force* EVERYONE not to have an error log OOTB? Why *force* >>>>>>> >>>>>> EVERYONE to >>>>>> >>>>>>> spend time and money to get it back in? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Adrian Crum < >>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacques, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That perspective goes both ways. From my perspective, you are trying >>>>>>>> *force* everyone to do things your way. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That is why everyone is trying to get you to realize that a >>>>>>>> one-size-fits-all setting will not work - because everyone is >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> different. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you want the error log on your installation, then configure it to >>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>> so. Why *force* EVERYONE to have an error log? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/15/2014 10:19 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Not when you want to quickly spot obvious errors that you can easily >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> fix >>>>>> >>>>>>> or wait to fix later, and yes I spent my share of debugging also... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But anyway, why do you want to *force* everybody to use the same way >>>>>>>>> than you, are you an OFBiz prophet? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Le 15/09/2014 10:53, Scott Gray a écrit : >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As someone who has spent thousands of hours debugging OFBiz >>>>>>>>>> installations I can assure you that the error.log is redundant and >>>>>>>>>> provides no true value over ofbiz.log. As I've mentioned a few >>>>>>>>>> times >>>>>>>>>> now, OFBiz errors are regularly worthless without knowledge of the >>>>>>>>>> context of the error which can only be found in ofbiz.log. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> With a few command line tools "clutter" is a total non-issue and >>>>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>>>> a basic knowledge of those tools is a total time saver when >>>>>>>>>> investigating log files. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 15/09/2014, at 7:43 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On the basis that log analysis and error identification/reporting >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> costs >>>>>> >>>>>>> money, and the more complex this process is the more it costs. >>>>>>>>>>> An error log contains less clutter and is the first point in >>>>>>>>>>> identification >>>>>>>>>>> and triage of (severe) issues in any organisation that has adopted >>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>> methodology for service delivery (e.g. ITIL, ISO/IEC 20000, etc), >>>>>>>>>>> specifically the error control process (in ITIL) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Without this OOTB more time is spend on: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - going through the other, more detailed log(s) in the various >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> OFBiz >>>>>> >>>>>>> systems an organisation might have (e.g. dev, test, prod, etc) >>>>>>>>>>> - getting the error log back and ensuring that it stays in. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Scott Gray < >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On what basis? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/09/2014, at 9:44 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I support reverting this regression. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Jacopo Cappellato < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 12, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand why you are so not open to put back the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error.log in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> log4j2.xml >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it is just one of 1 million possible ways to configure >>>>>>>>>>>>>> logging: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> is a specific one on not a generic one and so it is not better >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other 1 million possibilities; you have explained why you like >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> it but >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> me or >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> others could find similar arguments for the other millions ways; >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> since >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> one seconded you in your attempt to add the configuration back >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>> >>>>>>> confirms to me that this specific configuration is not better >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> than >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other; >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> for this reason it should be left out of the trunk. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and qualify this as a mess and almost myself and idiot. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't say this and the mail archive can demonstrate it; you >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have been >>>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to raise the tone of the conversation since the beginning >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of this >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thread (and you did the same in at least another thread >>>>>>>>>>>>>> recently) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> will not start to fight with you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> > |
Re: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
I would be in favor of adding more comments if it will help end users
configure their local copy. But keep in mind those comments remove the necessity of adding the error log to the trunk - since they will know how to enable it themselves. Adrian Crum Sandglass Software www.sandglass-software.com On 9/15/2014 1:47 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > > Le 15/09/2014 14:29, Adrian Crum a écrit : >> The issue has been resolved, so yes - I am trying to get you to shut >> up about it. > > I guess you speak about OFBIZ-5287. Then I have just reopened and > assigned it to myself. > My plan is to propose and alternative log4j2.xml with some inline > comments (never hurt if maintained) and to put back error.log. This is > in a patch submitted at OFBIZ-5287. > Then I will to ask users (on user ML) to vote for putting back the > error.log or not. This is called democracy and majority will tell us. I > have not much hope, but I want to try. > > Jacques >> >> If you spent half as much time creating a configuration patch as you >> did making your silly pointless arguments, then your customers and >> sysadmins would have the log configurations they need. >> >> Adrian Crum >> Sandglass Software >> www.sandglass-software.com >> >> On 9/15/2014 1:17 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>> I am not debating your point that configuring log settings is a standard >>> practice. I am debating the mimimum that OFBiz provides OOTB and whether >>> that is good enough for the majority of the users. >>> >>> I use OFBiz in my business. I offer it as a business solution to my >>> prospective customers, and I provide services around around OFBiz. >>> So yes, I have a vested interest in having a solution that is easily >>> implemented, including ease of reporting on functioning in any kind of >>> operation setting. An OOTB error.log helps with that. Having someone >>> to go >>> into an extensive log file and extract from there the errors and report >>> those is eating up more time than having the report ready. Likewise is >>> having to configure every new instantiation to get it to the default >>> that >>> is needed in a business environment (and according to business needs). >>> Having a feature set and a configuration setting that satisfies the >>> majority is better than having one that satisfies a minority. >>> >>> That you hold my argument as just for the sake of argumentative, is >>> beside >>> the reality I am faced with. A reality that others might have as >>> well. It >>> seems to me that your last remark is rather intended to have me (and >>> others) shut up about this than trying to resolve this issue. >>> >>> Pierre Smits >>> >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>> Services and Retail & Trade >>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Adrian Crum < >>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>>> I agree the importance is in the arguments. >>>> >>>> You have argued that *forcing* someone to configure their log >>>> settings in >>>> a production deployment places an undue burden on them. As I have >>>> pointed >>>> out, configuring log settings is standard practice - no one is being >>>> forced >>>> to do it. In fact, only a fool would run OFBiz in a production >>>> environment >>>> using the OOTB settings. >>>> >>>> So, your argument has been contrived simply for the sake of being >>>> argumentative. Clearly, your participation in this discussion is not >>>> in the >>>> best interest of the community. >>>> >>>> Adrian Crum >>>> Sandglass Software >>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>> >>>> On 9/15/2014 12:35 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>> >>>>> The timing of when an opinion is expressed in a posting should be >>>>> considered of a lesser importance than the arguments in such postings. >>>>> >>>>> Given that your viewpoint only supports your personal case, makes me >>>>> wonder >>>>> whether you have the best interest of other community members and >>>>> users at >>>>> heart. >>>>> >>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>> >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Pierre Smits >>>>> <[hidden email]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Having an error.log OOTB, for sure, doens't have a negative >>>>> impact on >>>>>> you. >>>>>> >>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>> >>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Scott Gray >>>>>> <[hidden email] >>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Everyone? So far we only have Jacques. Well and you I guess, but >>>>>>> that's >>>>>>> debatable considering you only just decided yesterday to form a >>>>>>> strong >>>>>>> opinion so I have my doubts about it having a negative impact for >>>>>>> you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15/09/2014, at 10:14 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why *force* EVERYONE not to have an error log OOTB? Why *force* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> EVERYONE to >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> spend time and money to get it back in? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Adrian Crum < >>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jacques, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That perspective goes both ways. From my perspective, you are >>>>>>>>> trying >>>>>>>>> *force* everyone to do things your way. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That is why everyone is trying to get you to realize that a >>>>>>>>> one-size-fits-all setting will not work - because everyone is >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> different. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If you want the error log on your installation, then configure >>>>>>>>> it to >>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>> so. Why *force* EVERYONE to have an error log? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>>>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 9/15/2014 10:19 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Not when you want to quickly spot obvious errors that you can >>>>>>>>> easily >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> fix >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> or wait to fix later, and yes I spent my share of debugging also... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> But anyway, why do you want to *force* everybody to use the >>>>>>>>>> same way >>>>>>>>>> than you, are you an OFBiz prophet? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Le 15/09/2014 10:53, Scott Gray a écrit : >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As someone who has spent thousands of hours debugging OFBiz >>>>>>>>>>> installations I can assure you that the error.log is >>>>>>>>>>> redundant and >>>>>>>>>>> provides no true value over ofbiz.log. As I've mentioned a few >>>>>>>>>>> times >>>>>>>>>>> now, OFBiz errors are regularly worthless without knowledge >>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>> context of the error which can only be found in ofbiz.log. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> With a few command line tools "clutter" is a total non-issue and >>>>>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>>>>> a basic knowledge of those tools is a total time saver when >>>>>>>>>>> investigating log files. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 15/09/2014, at 7:43 pm, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On the basis that log analysis and error >>>>>>>>>>> identification/reporting >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> costs >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> money, and the more complex this process is the more it costs. >>>>>>>>>>>> An error log contains less clutter and is the first point in >>>>>>>>>>>> identification >>>>>>>>>>>> and triage of (severe) issues in any organisation that has >>>>>>>>>>>> adopted >>>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>> methodology for service delivery (e.g. ITIL, ISO/IEC 20000, >>>>>>>>>>>> etc), >>>>>>>>>>>> specifically the error control process (in ITIL) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Without this OOTB more time is spend on: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - going through the other, more detailed log(s) in the >>>>>>>>>>>> various >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> OFBiz >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> systems an organisation might have (e.g. dev, test, prod, etc) >>>>>>>>>>>> - getting the error log back and ensuring that it stays in. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Scott Gray < >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email] >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On what basis? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/09/2014, at 9:44 pm, Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I support reverting this regression. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Jacopo Cappellato < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 12, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand why you are so not open to put back the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error.log in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> log4j2.xml >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it is just one of 1 million possible ways to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logging: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is a specific one on not a generic one and so it is not >>>>>>>>>>>>> better >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other 1 million possibilities; you have explained why you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it but >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> others could find similar arguments for the other >>>>>>>>>>>>> millions ways; >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> one seconded you in your attempt to add the configuration >>>>>>>>>>>>> back >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> confirms to me that this specific configuration is not better >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> than >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other; >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> for this reason it should be left out of the trunk. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and qualify this as a mess and almost myself and idiot. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't say this and the mail archive can demonstrate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it; you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to raise the tone of the conversation since the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beginning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thread (and you did the same in at least another thread >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recently) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will not start to fight with you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > |
Re: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
On Sep 15, 2014, at 2:47 PM, Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> wrote: > I guess you speak about OFBIZ-5287. Then I have just reopened and assigned it to myself. Don't mess up also with that; that ticket should be left closed. If you want to continue to waste our time on the error.log thing at least please create a new ticket for it. At least the release roadmap will be clean. Jacopo |
Re: Where is the error.log gone?
|
Administrator
|
Le 15/09/2014 16:13, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : > On Sep 15, 2014, at 2:47 PM, Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> I guess you speak about OFBIZ-5287. Then I have just reopened and assigned it to myself. > Don't mess up also with that; that ticket should be left closed. If you want to continue to waste our time on the error.log thing at least please create a new ticket for it. At least the release roadmap will be clean. Good point Jacques > > Jacopo > |
Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
In reply to this post by Scott Gray-2
Gentlemen,
seeing what Jacques is doing for OFBiz (what would ofbiz be without him?), is it such a problem, he can have his error log ? Because it was there and he thinks it is important, it is enough for me to let himhave it. Jacopo, please put it back and let everybody going back to the important subjects? Regards, Hans |
Re: Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
Interesting, message.
I don’t know what you mean, IMO, OFBiz will be not be in bad shape if Jacques was not doing what he is doing for OFBiz. Regards Anil Patel On Sep 15, 2014, at 8:50 PM, Hans Bakker <[hidden email]> wrote: > Gentlemen, > > seeing what Jacques is doing for OFBiz (what would ofbiz be without him?), is it such a problem, he can have his error log ? > > Because it was there and he thinks it is important, it is enough for me to let himhave it. > > Jacopo, please put it back and let everybody going back to the important subjects? > > Regards, > Hans |
|
|
Put that comment to a vote Anil. Let's see how many people you don't
even know that read and monitor these lists every day agree with you. I quite liked the error log. I wasn't married to it - but it was fairly handy to see if it was massive there was something amiss. If there was a vote to keep it I'd probably vote yes. From an outsider looking in this thread is doing nothing to promote the OFBiz "community spirit" and in fact highlights quite a serious "My bat, My ball" mentality that is now intrinsic here. Something handy was there for years then removed. Jacques questioned it and has spent the last few days being taken apart and at times it's getting personal. Just put it to a vote. Rupert Howell Provolve Ltd. Technopole Kingston Crescent Portsmouth PO2 8FA 07909 685308 http://www.provolve.com > On 16 Sep 2014, at 02:11, Anil Patel <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Interesting, message. > > I don’t know what you mean, IMO, OFBiz will be not be in bad shape if Jacques was not doing what he is doing for OFBiz. > > Regards > Anil Patel > > >> On Sep 15, 2014, at 8:50 PM, Hans Bakker <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Gentlemen, >> >> seeing what Jacques is doing for OFBiz (what would ofbiz be without him?), is it such a problem, he can have his error log ? >> >> Because it was there and he thinks it is important, it is enough for me to let himhave it. >> >> Jacopo, please put it back and let everybody going back to the important subjects? >> >> Regards, >> Hans > |
Re: Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
In reply to this post by Anil Patel-3
What a short sighted remark from someone who hasn't contributed to this
project as much as Jacques over the years. Not by a long shot. Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Anil Patel <[hidden email]> wrote: > Interesting, message. > > I don’t know what you mean, IMO, OFBiz will be not be in bad shape if > Jacques was not doing what he is doing for OFBiz. > > Regards > Anil Patel > > > On Sep 15, 2014, at 8:50 PM, Hans Bakker <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > Gentlemen, > > > > seeing what Jacques is doing for OFBiz (what would ofbiz be without > him?), is it such a problem, he can have his error log ? > > > > Because it was there and he thinks it is important, it is enough for me > to let himhave it. > > > > Jacopo, please put it back and let everybody going back to the important > subjects? > > > > Regards, > > Hans > > |
Re: Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
In reply to this post by Anil Patel-3
If i ever had any respect for you or your contributions, Anil, this would have certainly put an end to it. Jacques is the reason many of us contribute to the community and quite possibly the most friendly face around.
|
Re: Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
In reply to this post by rhowell
I too use error.log . I could live with out it as well but if there is a vote to keep it I'd definitely vote yes. Regards Jacques has been an active contributor to this project and I respect him for being so helpful on the ML. On 16 September 2014 12:13, rhowell [via OFBiz] <[hidden email]> wrote: Put that comment to a vote Anil. Let's see how many people you don't |
Re: Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
In reply to this post by Paul Piper
Where are the adults in this project?
This conversation has no business in a user forum. If you need to vent or feel that a personal attack is required, do it on Twitter or Facebook or better yet write yourself a memo and put it in a drawer to read later (year or two). If there is a serious technical disagreement where a consensus can not be reached through the JIRA comment process, sort it out in a Project Management Meeting and make a decision that is binding on the team. Then stop the bickering and get on with it. People who absolutely can not stay in business with an OFBiz suffering from the results of the decision will have to fork the project. It seems that the key contributors might benefit from a collaboration session with the whole multi-media support under the supervision of the chairperson to get a team strategy and reinforce the team spirit that is supposed to drive Apache projects. If the role of chairperson is contentious in gaining consensus on mission and strategy, perhaps someone from the ASF might be a good chairperson. Ron On 16/09/2014 4:01 AM, Paul Piper wrote: > If i ever had any respect for you or your contributions, Anil, this would > have certainly put an end to it. Jacques is the reason many of us contribute > to the community and quite possibly the most friendly face around. > > > Anil Patel-3 wrote >> Interesting, message. >> >> I don’t know what you mean, IMO, OFBiz will be not be in bad shape if >> Jacques was not doing what he is doing for OFBiz. >> >> Regards >> Anil Patel >> >> >> On Sep 15, 2014, at 8:50 PM, Hans Bakker < >> mailinglist@ >> > wrote: >> >>> Gentlemen, >>> >>> seeing what Jacques is doing for OFBiz (what would ofbiz be without >>> him?), is it such a problem, he can have his error log ? >>> >>> Because it was there and he thinks it is important, it is enough for me >>> to let himhave it. >>> >>> Jacopo, please put it back and let everybody going back to the important >>> subjects? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Hans > > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Where-is-the-error-log-gone-tp4654961p4655274.html > Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Ron Wheeler President Artifact Software Inc email: [hidden email] skype: ronaldmwheeler phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 |
Re: Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
In reply to this post by hans_bakker
On Sep 16, 2014, at 2:50 AM, Hans Bakker <[hidden email]> wrote: > ... > Jacopo, please put it back and let everybody going back to the important subjects? Hans, I agree with you on this, there are more important subjects to deal with and this error.log story has gone too far. Someone has to step back a bit, I guess... Ok, if Jacques will commit the error.log configuration (or jacques.log) then I will do my best to stay busy with something else and ignore that commit. Jacopo > > Regards, > Hans |
Re: Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
In reply to this post by Ron Wheeler
On Sep 16, 2014, at 3:35 PM, Ron Wheeler <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It seems that the key contributors might benefit from a collaboration session with the whole multi-media support under the supervision of the chairperson to get a team strategy and reinforce the team spirit that is supposed to drive Apache projects. This is something I was considering since a long time, thanks for mentioning it. We could have monthly Google Hangouts (or similar technology) to meet and know each other I don't think we should discuss team strategies, tasks priorities, the future of the project or similar... these are topics that is better to discuss in the mailing list for a series of reasons (visibility, time zones, log history etc...). It could be in the form of a "virtual pizza" (my Italian hat on, but Jacques can have escargot ;-) ) where the participants have some food and can chit chat of light topics (possibly not OFBiz). After all these years in the OFBiz community it would be good to know each other from a different point of view... and maybe this will help to remove some of the friction that we experience in this community. We could give it a try... at least we will not be able to stub each other during the hangout. Jacopo |
Re: Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
This sounds like a great idea to me Jacopo. I want to come to the hang outs!
The recent argumentative tone on the list is certainly not ideal, but IMO it is at least evidence that there are many of us who care a lot about OFBiz and its future. So we have that in common! To spend some time together in a google hangout (or similar) would help us remember that there are amazing human beings with quirks and strengths and weaknesses and the whole ball of wax behind those email messages. So count me in, it sounds like fun! Best regards, Mike On Sep 16, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]> wrote: > On Sep 16, 2014, at 3:35 PM, Ron Wheeler <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> It seems that the key contributors might benefit from a collaboration session with the whole multi-media support under the supervision of the chairperson to get a team strategy and reinforce the team spirit that is supposed to drive Apache projects. > > This is something I was considering since a long time, thanks for mentioning it. > We could have monthly Google Hangouts (or similar technology) to meet and know each other > I don't think we should discuss team strategies, tasks priorities, the future of the project or similar... these are topics that is better to discuss in the mailing list for a series of reasons (visibility, time zones, log history etc...). > It could be in the form of a "virtual pizza" (my Italian hat on, but Jacques can have escargot ;-) ) where the participants have some food and can chit chat of light topics (possibly not OFBiz). > After all these years in the OFBiz community it would be good to know each other from a different point of view... and maybe this will help to remove some of the friction that we experience in this community. > We could give it a try... at least we will not be able to stub each other during the hangout. > > Jacopo > |
Re: Please stop! was: Where is the error.log gone?
|
|
+1 on my end as well. It would allow us to answer newcomer-questions and also make it easier to discuss important topics that have the tendency to get heated.
|
«
Return to OFBiz - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |