Should NLog fully replace Microsoft Logger in Core 2.0

[alexandrejobin]

I was playing with ASPNet Core 2.0 and NLog this week and faced the problem that even if nlog is configured to log everything (trace, debug, etc), nlog will only receive what is configured with Microsoft Logger. By default, Microsoft logger only send messages with level Information and up. It's seems to have confused a lot of people here (#167, #171, #128, #175, #166, #234, #238, etc).

Is there any talks about replacing the Microsoft Logger entirely with nlog instead of putting nlog behind it? Serilog is replacing the Microsoft Logger completly and it seems more natural in my opinion. Otherwise, it is like saying that nlog is a provider for Microsoft Logger but you need to configure 2 frameworks to make it work correctly so it might be confusing.

So instead of the actuel implementation flow where the LoggerInformation is responsable of dispatching the log by following his own rules and then follow the nlog rules:

Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Logger -> Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.LoggerInformation -> NLog.Extensions.Logging.NLogLogger

nlog would be fully responsable of what he is doing with this flow :

Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Logger -> NLog.Extensions.Logging.NLogLogger

So you need to choose between Microsoft Logger OR NLog but not both. Any thoughts?

[304NotModified]

Is there any talks about replacing the Microsoft Logger entirely with nlog instead of putting nlog behind it?

yes, but there are downsides also. Replacing = create custom factory, and that is: #235

Serilog is replacing the Microsoft Logger completly and it seems more natural in my opinion

it has it's pros and cons, see also #235

I was playing with ASPNet Core 2.0 and NLog this week and faced the problem that even if nlog is configured to log everything (trace, debug, etc), nlog will only receive what is configured with Microsoft Logger. By default, Microsoft logger only send messages with level Information and up. It's seems to have confused a lot of people here (#167, #171, #128, #175, #166, #234, #238, etc).

Agree on that

[304NotModified]

maybe continue on #235 and close this one, OK?

[alexandrejobin]

alright!