You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 17, 2019. It is now read-only.
I am working on a StackStorm pack for NAPALM (more on that later! 😄) and my sensor is designed to check on a few devices periodically for changes. In this case, a connection failure is perfectly normal, and I'd like to keep the stackstorm logs clean of such an event. However, this shows that the "catch-all" exception method is being printed, instead of leveraging a more traditional logging facility. When I'm looking at the console for my sensor, this makes things look dirty.
I can make the change, but wanted to open an issue in case this was done for a reason. The logging module is used elsewhere, could this be done here too instead of printing?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I am working on a StackStorm pack for NAPALM (more on that later! 😄)
Wut! How cool is that!? : )
The issue at hand
The print there is to encourage users finding exceptions that we are not normalizing to open an issue. If you prefer to use the logging subsystem or just change the print so it goes to stderr instead I am fine with that : ) I just didn't want to manipulate the original Exception.
I am working on a StackStorm pack for NAPALM (more on that later! 😄) and my sensor is designed to check on a few devices periodically for changes. In this case, a connection failure is perfectly normal, and I'd like to keep the stackstorm logs clean of such an event. However, this shows that the "catch-all" exception method is being printed, instead of leveraging a more traditional logging facility. When I'm looking at the console for my sensor, this makes things look dirty.
I can make the change, but wanted to open an issue in case this was done for a reason. The
logging
module is used elsewhere, could this be done here too instead of printing?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: