Proposed changes to logging defaults

[Jean-Michel Pichavant]

Vinay Sajip wrote:
> Some changes are being proposed to how logging works in default
> configurations.
>
> Briefly - when a logging event occurs which needs to be output to some
> log, the behaviour of the logging package when no explicit logging
> configuration is provided will change, most likely to log those events
> to sys.stderr with a default format.
>
> Since this proposed change to behaviour is backwards-incompatible (and
> scheduled to come in to Python 3.2 - earlier Pythons, including 2.X,
> are unaffected), you may be interested in seeing if the changes affect
> you. More details are available here:
>
> http://plumberjack.blogspot.com/2010/12/proposed-changes-to-logging-defaults.html
>
> Please feel free to add comments to the linked blog post.
>
> Regards,
>
> Vinay Sajip
>   
Why would you log informative messages to stderr ? (debug, info, warning)
How stderr is a better choice than stdout ?

A naive approach would rather send errors to stderr & everything else on 
stdout (including warnings ?).

IMO, the StreamHandler(sys.stderr) level should be set to logging.ERROR 
by default. Because nobody can answer the question 'is a warning an 
error', endless debate, there's a risk to log warnings to stderr.
I also think that if someone did'nt care about configuring the logging 
machine for 3rd party libraries, this guy just don't care about those 
library warnings.

Last question, if no handler is found, why not simply drop the log 
event, doing nothing ? It sounds pretty reasonable and less intrusive.

JM