Uploaded image for project: 'Jenkins'
  1. Jenkins
  2. JENKINS-12913

Unnecessary logging in hudson.plugins.accurev.ParseChangeLog

    XMLWordPrintable

Details

    Description

      Our jenkins logs fill up with the following:

      Feb 27, 2012 7:13:22 PM hudson.plugins.accurev.ParseChangeLog parse
      INFO: transactions size = 1

      It's not particularly useful - perhaps it was left on inadvertantly.

      Attachments

        Activity

          pickgr1 pickgr added a comment -

          Here's a quick patch for this. I'd really like this to be picked up and a new release of the plugin created I'm not sure if I can do this myself?

          diff --git a/src/main/java/hudson/plugins/accurev/ParseChangeLog.java b/src/main/java/hudson/plugins/accurev/ParseChangeLog.java
          index 8a24386..05df79e 100644
          --- a/src/main/java/hudson/plugins/accurev/ParseChangeLog.java
          +++ b/src/main/java/hudson/plugins/accurev/ParseChangeLog.java
          @@ -55,7 +55,6 @@ class ParseChangeLog extends ChangeLogParser {
                       throw new IOException2(e);
                   }
          
          -        logger.info("transactions size = " + transactions.size());
                   return new AccurevChangeLogSet(build, transactions);
               }
          
          
          pickgr1 pickgr added a comment - Here's a quick patch for this. I'd really like this to be picked up and a new release of the plugin created I'm not sure if I can do this myself? diff --git a/src/main/java/hudson/plugins/accurev/ParseChangeLog.java b/src/main/java/hudson/plugins/accurev/ParseChangeLog.java index 8a24386..05df79e 100644 --- a/src/main/java/hudson/plugins/accurev/ParseChangeLog.java +++ b/src/main/java/hudson/plugins/accurev/ParseChangeLog.java @@ -55,7 +55,6 @@ class ParseChangeLog extends ChangeLogParser { throw new IOException2(e); } - logger.info("transactions size = " + transactions.size()); return new AccurevChangeLogSet(build, transactions); }
          pjdarton pjdarton added a comment -

          Yes, it was left in. This code has a lot of "history" behind it.

          Might be an idea to turn the log level down a notch (e.g. to debug) instead of completely removing it though - when things go wrong, such logging is very useful.

          pjdarton pjdarton added a comment - Yes, it was left in. This code has a lot of "history" behind it. Might be an idea to turn the log level down a notch (e.g. to debug) instead of completely removing it though - when things go wrong, such logging is very useful.

          Decided to go ahead and remove it.

          casz Joseph Petersen (old) added a comment - Decided to go ahead and remove it.

          People

            jetersen Joseph Petersen
            pickgr1 pickgr
            Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            1 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: