BIND 10 #747: Conversion of server common library to use the new logging interface

[BIND 10 Development]

#747: Conversion of server common library to use the new logging interface
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                   Reporter:         |                 Owner:  vorner
  stephen                            |                Status:  reviewing
                       Type:         |             Milestone:
  enhancement                        |  Sprint-20110628
                   Priority:  major  |            Resolution:
                  Component:         |             Sensitive:  0
  Unclassified                       |           Sub-Project:  Core
                   Keywords:         |  Estimated Difficulty:  4.0
            Defect Severity:  N/A    |           Total Hours:  0
Feature Depending on Ticket:         |
        Add Hours to Ticket:  0      |
                  Internal?:  0      |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by stephen):

 * owner:  stephen => vorner


Comment:

 Reviewed commit d137040ad98f7203cd440ca8b449a84f048af6fd

 '''src/lib/log/log_formatter.h'''
 Should add a header to the new method.  (And to be consistent for the
 Doxygen output, both this and the string specialisation
 of the "arg" method should include documentation of the parameter and the
 return value.)


 '''src/lib/server_common/server_common_messages.mes'''
 The message ID prefix SRV_COMMON_ .  As it contained the underscore, I was
 reading message IDs like SRV_COMMON_ADDRESS_MISSING as "prefix SRV, ID is
 COMMON_ADDRESS_MISSING" and wondering what a common address was.  I would
 suggest using something like SRVCOMM_ as the prefix.

 SRV_COMMON_ADDRESSES_NOT_LIST
 Can we extend the description to suggest what part of the configuration is
 in error? (The exception thrown after this message is issued (in
 portconfig.cc) includes the element name.)

 SRV_COMMON_ADDRESS_FAIL
 Can we identify what address/port the failure was on?  At the moment the
 message only lists the exception text - will that contain the necessary
 information?  Also, the description suggests that the server was listening
 on a port before.  Perhaps the text should mention that this message is
 the result of a configuration update?

 SRV_COMMON_ADDRESS_MISSING
 Rather than "Some address specification is missing..." suggest that "An
 address specification in the configuration is missing either an address or
 port and so cannot be used.  The specification causing the error is given
 in the message."

 SRV_COMMON_ADDRESS_TYPE
 Same comments as for the previous message.  Rather than "Some address
 specification is malformed", suggest "An address specification in the
 configuration is malformed: the specification causing the error is given
 in the message. A valid specification contains an address part (which must
 be a string and must represent a valid IPv4 or IPv6 address) and a port
 (which must be an integer in the range valid for TCP/UDP ports on your
 system)."

 SRV_COMMON_ADDRESS_UNRECOVERABLE
 The second paragraph is really quite candid! :-)  However, I think it is a
 bit flippant and could give the impression that we are not too concerned
 about keeping the server running.  Would suggest something a bit more
 conservative like:
 {{{
 The recovery of old addresses after the SRV_COMMON_ADDRESS_FAIL condition
 has also failed for the reason listed.

 The condition indicates problems with the server and/or the system on
 which it is running.  The server will continue running with any other
 configured addresses although the service may be severely degraded.
 }}}

 SRV_COMMON_KEYS_DEINIT
 Spelling - missing "a" in deinitializing".  Also, the text suggests that
 the appearance of this message is random.  I presume that this is because
 it is generated only if the server explicitly calls the deinitialization
 code.  Perhaps better would be to just not say anything about when it can
 appear.

 SRV_COMMON_KEYS_UPDATE
 Should be "...is initializing the global TSIG keyring."

 SRV_COMMON_SET_LISTEN
 The description says "listening on a different set of IP addresses and
 ports".  Different from what?

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/747#comment:8>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development