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

Issue/#159 - consistent names for loggers #180

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Mar 15, 2017
Merged

Conversation

shukon
Copy link
Collaborator

@shukon shukon commented Feb 14, 2017

Changed logger-names and removed most trailing white-spaces while at it.

Coverage decreased because a line duplicate is removed in runhistory2epm... not sure what to do about it.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Feb 14, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.009%) to 81.711% when pulling 9cf84fd on issue/#159 into b99dd8f on development.

Copy link
Contributor

@mlindauer mlindauer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would prefer a more generic and fail-safe solution; e.g., by using CLASS.__module__+"."+CLASS.__name__

@mfeurer
Copy link
Contributor

mfeurer commented Feb 23, 2017

You don't need to worry about minimal coverage reduction. And I agree with Marius' suggestion for class naming.

@shukon
Copy link
Collaborator Author

shukon commented Feb 24, 2017

I can do that, but logger-names will not be as nice for the eyes, e.g. smac.scenario.scenario.Scenario or test_scenario.test_scenario.ScenarioTest. Is that good or should I crop the last part of the module-name?

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 14, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.03%) to 81.747% when pulling 7a94c87 on issue/#159 into b99dd8f on development.

@mlindauer mlindauer merged commit 186f113 into development Mar 15, 2017
@mlindauer mlindauer deleted the issue/#159 branch March 15, 2017 08:08
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.

4 participants