Skip to content

[3.6] bpo-31457: Don't omit inner process() calls with nested LogAdapters #4050

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 19, 2017

Conversation

miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

@miss-islington miss-islington commented Oct 19, 2017

This used to be the case on Python 2. Commit
212b590 changed the implementation for Python
3, making the log() method of LogAdapter call logger._log() directly. This
makes nested log adapters not execute their process() method. This patch
fixes the issue.

Also, now proxying name, too, to make repr() work with nested log adapters.

New tests added.
(cherry picked from commit ce9e625)

https://bugs.python.org/issue31457

…rs (pythonGH-4044)

This used to be the case on Python 2.  Commit
212b590 changed the implementation for Python
3, making the `log()` method of LogAdapter call `logger._log()` directly.  This
makes nested log adapters not execute their ``process()`` method.  This patch
fixes the issue.

Also, now proxying `name`, too, to make `repr()` work with nested log adapters.

New tests added.
(cherry picked from commit ce9e625)
@Mariatta Mariatta changed the title [3.6] title [3.6] bpo-31457: Don't omit inner process() calls with nested LogAdapters Oct 19, 2017
@Mariatta Mariatta merged commit 4d9a8f2 into python:3.6 Oct 19, 2017
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks, @Mariatta!

@miss-islington miss-islington deleted the backport-ce9e625-3.6 branch October 19, 2017 18:11
@ambv
Copy link
Contributor

ambv commented Oct 19, 2017

Yup, thanks Mariatta! :-)

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.

5 participants