On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 6:02 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 7 March 2016 at 19:25, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >>> Does it make sense to filters these auto messages? >> >> I don't believe that LDAP failover, for example, should generate a >> message. I've suggested two solutions: not use "warning" for that, or >> changing it so that warning doesn't generate a message. I leave it up >> to Sebb to decide which is best for the tools that he has been >> primarily focused on: i.e., public_json. > > I don't think PMB needs to report on warnings. > However equally I don't think they should be lost to history once the > next job runs or the next warning occurs. > This means keeping some kind of log of the events; PMB has been > performing that role so far, though it's not ideal. > > At present we keep only the current log, and archive it if there is a > warning or higher. > This only preserves the latest warning for each job.
If you want to use a mailing list as a log, perhaps it would be best to have a separate one? https://infra.apache.org/officers/mlreq - Sam Ruby >> - Sam Ruby >> >>>> On Mar 4, 2016, at 7:23 AM, Ping My Box <no-re...@pingmybox.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> The https service at whimsy.apache.org (whimsy.apache.org (https)) seems >>>> to be back in working order again. >>>> >>>> With regards, >>>> Ping My Box - https://www.pingmybox.com/ >>>
