Skip to content
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

✨ Dont send .metadata logs to stdout & update to go 1.21 #706

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 21, 2024

Conversation

eemcmullan
Copy link
Contributor

Without running analysis in a container, logs such as below were sent to stdout and cluttering other analysis logs:

INFO[0006] evaluating rules for violations. see analysis.log for more info
2024/10/03 11:19:01 Re-opening moved/deleted file .metadata/.log ...
2024/10/03 11:19:01 Waiting for .metadata/.log to appear...
2024/10/03 11:19:01 Successfully reopened .metadata/.log

Logs from the language server are still available:

time="2024-10-14T15:34:38-04:00" level=info msg="language server log" line="!MESSAGE KONVEYOR_LOG: source-only analysis mode only scoping to Sources" provider=java
time="2024-10-14T15:34:38-04:00" level=info msg="language server log" line="!MESSAGE KONVEYOR_LOG: found errors: [] warnings: []" provider=java
time="2024-10-14T15:34:38-04:00" level=info msg="language server log" line="!MESSAGE KONVEYOR_LOG: pattern: TypeDeclarationPattern: qualification<javax.management>, type<j2ee*> TypeDeclarationPattern: pkg<*>, enclosing<*>, type<j2ee*>, pattern match, case sensitive, generic full match, fine grain: none | TypeReferencePattern: qualification<javax.management>, type<j2ee*>, pattern match, case sensitive, generic full match, fine grain: none" provider=java

@eemcmullan eemcmullan changed the title Dont send .metadata logs to stdout & update to go 1.22 ✨ Dont send .metadata logs to stdout & update to go 1.22 Oct 14, 2024
Copy link
Member

@aufi aufi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The logging change looks good to me 👍

The CI seems to be failing on go 1.22 in go.mod vs. 1.20 in builder image https://github.com/konveyor/analyzer-lsp/blob/main/Dockerfile#L1

@eemcmullan eemcmullan force-pushed the meta-logs branch 2 times, most recently from d9e437b to 9dda2ce Compare October 16, 2024 15:10
@eemcmullan eemcmullan changed the title ✨ Dont send .metadata logs to stdout & update to go 1.22 ✨ Dont send .metadata logs to stdout & update to go 1.21 Oct 16, 2024
Signed-off-by: Emily McMullan <emcmulla@redhat.com>
@eemcmullan eemcmullan merged commit e308a56 into konveyor:main Oct 21, 2024
9 checks passed
jmle pushed a commit to jmle/analyzer-lsp that referenced this pull request Oct 25, 2024
Without running analysis in a container, logs such as below were sent to
stdout and cluttering other analysis logs:

```
INFO[0006] evaluating rules for violations. see analysis.log for more info
2024/10/03 11:19:01 Re-opening moved/deleted file .metadata/.log ...
2024/10/03 11:19:01 Waiting for .metadata/.log to appear...
2024/10/03 11:19:01 Successfully reopened .metadata/.log
```

Logs from the language server are still available:

```
time="2024-10-14T15:34:38-04:00" level=info msg="language server log" line="!MESSAGE KONVEYOR_LOG: source-only analysis mode only scoping to Sources" provider=java
time="2024-10-14T15:34:38-04:00" level=info msg="language server log" line="!MESSAGE KONVEYOR_LOG: found errors: [] warnings: []" provider=java
time="2024-10-14T15:34:38-04:00" level=info msg="language server log" line="!MESSAGE KONVEYOR_LOG: pattern: TypeDeclarationPattern: qualification<javax.management>, type<j2ee*> TypeDeclarationPattern: pkg<*>, enclosing<*>, type<j2ee*>, pattern match, case sensitive, generic full match, fine grain: none | TypeReferencePattern: qualification<javax.management>, type<j2ee*>, pattern match, case sensitive, generic full match, fine grain: none" provider=java
```

Signed-off-by: Emily McMullan <emcmulla@redhat.com>
@eemcmullan eemcmullan deleted the meta-logs branch November 26, 2024 15:59
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.

2 participants