Comment by sgarland
4 days ago
Also becomes rapidly apparent that most modern tooling takes an extremely liberal view of logging levels. The fact that you’ve successfully processed a file is not INFO, that’s DEBUG.
4 days ago
Also becomes rapidly apparent that most modern tooling takes an extremely liberal view of logging levels. The fact that you’ve successfully processed a file is not INFO, that’s DEBUG.
"Finished conversion of xyz.mp3 to xyz.ogg" is valuable progress information to a regular user, not just to developers, so it belongs in INFO, not DEBUG.
I suppose this is subjective, but I disagree. If I want to know the status of each item, I’d pass -v to the command. A simple summary at the end is sufficient; if I pass -q, I expect it to print nothing, only issuing a return code.
> If I want to know the status of each item, I’d pass -v to the command.
I don't disagree. In my opinion, the default log level for CLI applications should be WARN, showing errors and warnings. -q should turn this OFF (alternatively, -q for ERROR, and -qq for OFF), -v means INFO, -vv DEBUG, -vvv TRACE. For servers and daemons, the default should probably be INFO, but that's debatable.