v2: Add support for the zerolog logging provider #299
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## v2 #299 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 83.58% 84.01% +0.42%
==========================================
Files 30 30
Lines 932 932
==========================================
+ Hits 779 783 +4
+ Misses 114 110 -4
Partials 39 39
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
| case logging.ERROR: | ||
| cl.Error().Msg(msg) | ||
| default: | ||
| // TODO(kb): Perhaps this should be a logged warning, defaulting to ERROR to get attention |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good, point let's have this discussion wider in some ticket/issue. I think panic is fine as this should be covered by tests (: (not necessarily in this project, but also for users).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also TBH we should have some linter to check if we implement all values of this enum. It should be trivial - I will add issue exactly about this 🤗
|
Thanks! ❤️ |
|
Yeah, definitely a huge improvement in breaking out the logging-variant bits rather than duplicating lots of code that won't really be fully grokked (or questioned) with each port of a new logger. |
Integrates zerolog into go-grpc-middleware/providers.
I welcome all feedback!