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

reporegistry: move to logrus instead of log.Printf() #1001

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 4, 2024

Conversation

mvo5
Copy link
Contributor

@mvo5 mvo5 commented Oct 29, 2024

This commit removes the direct log.Printf() from the repo loading. With the coming daemonless CLI frontend to image building these prints are distracting for our users.

Instead logrus (which is already used in the images library) is used with the appropriate "Debugf()" and "Warnf()" methods.

@mvo5 mvo5 requested a review from thozza October 29, 2024 12:31
supakeen
supakeen previously approved these changes Oct 29, 2024
Copy link
Member

@achilleas-k achilleas-k left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM (minus Tomáš' comment).

This commit removes the direct log.Printf() from the repo loading.
With the coming daemonless CLI frontend to image building these
prints are distracting for our users.

Instead logrus (which is already used in the images library) is
used with the appropriate "Infof()" and "Warnf()" methods.
@mvo5 mvo5 force-pushed the reporegistry-logrus branch from 8ee8ef4 to 6e4b2b3 Compare October 31, 2024 18:07
Copy link
Member

@thozza thozza left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

@mvo5 mvo5 added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 4, 2024
Merged via the queue into osbuild:main with commit 020794b Nov 4, 2024
17 of 19 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants