gistfile1.txt

gholt		Mar 14

Patch Set 1: I would prefer that you didn't submit this

swift/common/middleware/proxy_logging.py:152:9: E301 expected 1 blank line, found 0

This is called proxy_logging in some places, access-logging in others. With where it is
suggested in the pipeline, it seems like access-logging would be the proper name.

However, with this change some requests will be double-logged due to folks writing
middleware that emulates the old proxy logging. I think the double-logged thing should be
fine; I'm not aware of any places were it would be a big issue, but maybe something to
consider.

I am worried we'd be losing the logging for "subrequests" -- requests that middleware
makes to get its job done. For instance, swauth and staticweb (and the future sos)
subrequests would go silent.

Maybe it really should be called proxy-logging everywhere and go just outside the proxy in
the pipeline?

If this were a brand new project, I'd rather each middleware piece log it's own
subrequests and not log the overall request (which would get caught by your new
middleware); but unfortunately this isn't greenfield. :/