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

Decrease log level for 4xx HTTP errors #1298

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

ccoVeille
Copy link
Contributor

@ccoVeille ccoVeille commented Dec 12, 2024

Pull Request Template

Description:

Checklist:

  • I have formatted my code using goimport and golangci-lint.
  • All new code is covered by unit tests.
  • This PR does not decrease the overall code coverage.
  • I have reviewed the code comments and documentation for clarity.

Thank you for your contribution!

@ccoVeille ccoVeille mentioned this pull request Dec 12, 2024
4 tasks
@coolwednesday
Copy link
Contributor

@ccoVeille, a better name for the PR would be appreciated.

@Umang01-hash
Copy link
Member

Umang01-hash commented Dec 12, 2024

@ccoVeille I tested your solution and it is working perfectly fine.
I have updated the description.
Please also update the PR name.

And also it would be nice if you can add test for the newly added code.

@ccoVeille
Copy link
Contributor Author

ccoVeille commented Dec 12, 2024

This PR target branch was your PR one @Umang01-hash

It explains why the PR description was so basic. The tests were the ones you added.

I should have mentioned and use draft.

I was planning you to merge them in your branch, then keep the discussion running in your PR.

I'll sort that, no worries.

@ccoVeille ccoVeille changed the base branch from fix/4xx_logs to development December 12, 2024 06:30
@ccoVeille ccoVeille changed the title implements suggested solution Decrease log level for 4xx HTTP errors Dec 12, 2024
@ccoVeille
Copy link
Contributor Author

I implemented here what I initially planned.

But I felt like it was not a good way to do. Something that couldn't scale easily,

So I provided an alternative implementation that would allow more than the current one.

See

For me, it supersedes the current PR, that now becomes pointless.

@ccoVeille ccoVeille closed this Dec 13, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants