On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> writes: > >> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:10:12AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> Please spell "Python" with a capital "P" (it's a proper name). >>> >>> Amador Pahim <apa...@redhat.com> writes: >>> >>> > Let's provide extra control and flexibility by using python logging >>> > system instead of print and/or sys.std*.write(). >>> > >>> > Signed-off-by: Amador Pahim <apa...@redhat.com> >>> >>> How exactly does this change error messages? >>> >>> Is logging the right tool to report errors to the human user? I'm >>> asking because logging and error reporting are generally separate >>> things. Example: a program runs into a recoverable error. It logs the >>> error, but does not report it. >>> >>> Is reporting errors to stderr the right thing to do for library class >>> QEMUMachine? I doubt it. Libraries throw exceptions and let their >>> users decide how to handle them. >> >> I believe the "qemu received signal" event is supposed to be >> logged, not necessarily reported. Callers can then choose where >> the log messages should go (scripts could choose to send them >> directly to stderr if verbose or debugging mode is enabled). We >> don't even need an exception for it: we can let callers check >> exitcode() and decide what to do about the QEMU exit code. > > Makes sense. > >> The send_fd_scm() messages, on the other hand, could become >> exceptions, and don't need the logging system at all. > > I think we all agree that printing to stderr is not a good idea for this > library class. Instead of a blanket conversion to logging without > further explanation, I'd like to see cleanup with rationale such as > yours.
Ok.
