Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Upgrade env_logger #4951

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 18, 2018
Merged

Upgrade env_logger #4951

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 18, 2018

Conversation

sfackler
Copy link
Member

0.4 depends on log 0.3 and so misses out on module names.

@rust-highfive
Copy link

r? @alexcrichton

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

We've unfortunately gotten bitten in the past because of prerelease versions. I think Cargo will consider it semver compatible with 0.5.0 for example? (which sometimes has API breaking changes).

@KodrAus out of curiosity, do you know if 0.5.0 will happen soon?

@sfackler
Copy link
Member Author

I can switch it to an equality constraint, but a full 0.5.0 release would be best, yeah.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@KodrAus mentioned that env_logger is close to an 0.5 release (like in the next day or two), so r=me if we hold out for that and then update here.

@sfackler
Copy link
Member Author

👍

@KodrAus
Copy link

KodrAus commented Jan 16, 2018

Thanks @sfackler! Yep, I'm pushing out 0.5 today, just checking the docs now for typos and broken links. There are a few differences between the versions you might be interested in for cargo:

  • env_logger now depends on chrono
  • env_logger now include a timestamp in the format by default. If this is too noisy we can tweak the format to remove it
  • env_logger now writes colours, read from an environment variable by default

I spiked out an upgrade that tried to maintain the cargo command's own colour choice here. If you ignore the fact that it leaks it's a lot of machinery for coloured output, but if folks want coloured logs from cargo using env_logger I think we'll need something like that.

The simpler approach would be something like:

env_logger::Builder::from_env(env_logger::Env::default())
    .write_style(env_logger::WriteStyle::Never)
    .init();

So that we never write coloured logs.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Looks like a new version is out! @sfackler want to update this PR?

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Thanks @KodrAus!

0.4 depends on log 0.3 and so misses out on module names.
@sfackler
Copy link
Member Author

Updated!

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: r+

Thanks @sfackler!

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 17, 2018

📌 Commit a540a39 has been approved by alexcrichton

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 17, 2018

⌛ Testing commit a540a39 with merge 3eea5fe827f506931f6303e853219bdd47f6b7b9...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 17, 2018

💔 Test failed - status-travis

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

alexcrichton commented Jan 17, 2018 via email

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 17, 2018

⌛ Testing commit a540a39 with merge c6cf5f0218b9d54d63d2eb4a6c158d72eedc25ab...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 17, 2018

💔 Test failed - status-travis

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: retry

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 17, 2018

⌛ Testing commit a540a39 with merge 388e0c476774606596d434eda8b3b2705332cc3d...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 18, 2018

💥 Test timed out

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: retry

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 18, 2018

⌛ Testing commit a540a39 with merge bc35fa6...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2018
Upgrade env_logger

0.4 depends on log 0.3 and so misses out on module names.
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 18, 2018

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: alexcrichton
Pushing bc35fa6 to master...

@bors bors merged commit a540a39 into rust-lang:master Jan 18, 2018
@sfackler sfackler deleted the log-bump branch January 18, 2018 06:54
@ehuss ehuss added this to the 1.25.0 milestone Feb 6, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants