Message 28960

Author
pokoli
Date
2016-09-23.14:51:58
Message id
28960

Content

El 22/09/16 a les 10:15, Cédric Krier ha escrit:
> On 2016-09-22 09:49, Sergi Almacellas Abellana wrote:
>>> > > Cédric Krier <cedric.krier@b2ck.com> added the comment:
>>> > > 
>>> > > I'm wondering if it should not be a logging feature instead of changing the error message because it is for debugging purpose.
>> > 
>> > Maybe we should add both options,
> For me, it is wrong to show ID to the end user.

I must admit that i'm not very convinced with the current proposal which includes the ID in the message as sometimes it wont be usufull for the user. Two examples: 

1. Fields inside One2Many as id is normally hiden. 
2. When failing record is a newly created record (already explained in the thread)
> 
>> > but in which log level are you thinking? Because for me using DEBUG should be so much intrusive.
> Maybe INFO because this is normally something that should never happen
> except if there is a bug or forged requests so it will not be too verbose.

Ok, so lets add it as INFO logging and forget about adding the ID in the error message.
History
Date User Action Args
2016-09-23 14:51:58pokolisetmessageid: <1474635118.76.0.21440993041.issue5581@tryton.org>
2016-09-23 14:51:58pokolisetrecipients: + ced, resteve, guillemNaN, reviewbot
2016-09-23 14:51:58pokolilinkissue5581 messages
2016-09-23 14:51:58pokolicreate

Showing 10 items. Show all history (warning: this could be VERY long)