[rb]: Standardise driver logging output

[luke-hill]

Ensure all log formats (Including browser ones), are in a consistent format

Thanks for contributing to Selenium!
A PR well described will help maintainers to quickly review and merge it

Before submitting your PR, please check our contributing guidelines.
Avoid large PRs, help reviewers by making them as simple and short as possible.

Description

Alter logging to conform to other standard log formats

Motivation and Context

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist

• I have read the contributing document.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[luke-hill]

Failure seems unrelated

 1) Selenium::WebDriver::DevTools network interception changes requests
     Failure/Error: expect(driver.find_elements(tag_name: 'img').map(&:size).uniq).to eq([Dimension.new(640, 480)])
     
       expected: [#<struct Selenium::WebDriver::Dimension width=640, height=480>]
            got: [#<struct Selenium::WebDriver::Dimension width=0, height=0>, #<struct Selenium::WebDriver::Dimension width=640, height=480>]
     
       (compared using ==)

Not really sure what happened here, guessing there is a secondary blank 0x0 image somewhere on the page it's finding?

[titusfortner]

This isn't a backward compatible change and the code isn't marked as @api private, even if maybe it should be. What are you trying to do and how does this change make it better?

[p0deje]

I don't quite follow what do we standard against. Do you want the browser logs to look like Ruby's Logger class?

[p0deje]

Is there any value to change the order here? Even though nobody should be initializing this class directly, I don't believe it's worth breaking backwards compatibility without a good reason.

[luke-hill]

I'll undo this change, but it was only used in the entire codebase in one location, which was api private.

[luke-hill]

Sorry yes. The other logger formats in a different way, and the timestamp is always first in most loggers. Here it wasn't.

[sonarcloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

[luke-hill]

Is this RtM now @p0deje (The ruby failure seems to find a 0x0 reference).

[p0deje]

@luke-hill Could you please reply to #9850 (review)?