Re: [boost] Review of Logging library begins today February 4th

From: Jurko Gospodnetić (jurko.gospodnetic_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-05 19:44:53

   Hi Scott.

> Some examples of representation;
> 
> After completion there were 3 leftovers and ...
> After completion there were <3> leftovers and ...
> After completion there were <3!unsigned int> leftovers and ...
> After completion there were <3!unsigned int/matching_profile> leftovers and 
> ...

   What you suggest is a whole new layer built on top of what the log 
library provides - as proposed & currently implemented. YMMV but what it 
does provide is something I find 'seriously lacking' in the currently 
available set of C++ libraries.

   Stating that it should not be accepted only due to it not containing 
that additional layer of support seems wrong, provided of course that 
what it does provide passes well through this public review. :-)

   The layer you request can, and would most likely be useful to, be 
build on top of what this library provides, either as a part of this or 
a separate library, but requiring that it 'solve the world' before 
accepting it seems too much. I can only imagine the next guy saying that 
it should not be accepted because it does not provide an out-of-the-box 
industry-grade network logging server that can be easily integrated with 
customer's standard Kerberos based authentication/authorization server 
to provide security over who can access those logs. :-)

   That said, I really hope to find the time to review the library. :-) 
Having such a library in boost seems like it would be a great plus. It 
would provide an arguably high-quality logging solution somewhere where 
lots of developers look first for high-quality solutions and would 
automatically gain it a large number of potential high-quality 
users/supporters/developers/reviewers as boost libraries have always had 
great support & maintenance and I do not recall many that got 
unmaintained and none that got absolutely lost & untouchable...

   Most, if not all, logging libraries I tried suffer greatly from not 
having that. Either their design grew stale and stuck in different 
backward compatibility issues or they stopped being developed all 
together. Using them always seemed like a not such a big step away from 
'rolling your own', which then you most often actually do...

   Best regards,
     Jurko Gospodnetić