▲ | throwaway150 5 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Appreciate the response. But ... > Since OP mentions logging, it’s worth noting that for instrumentation and observability we’ve embraced OpenTelemetry and have an instrumentation.ts convention That makes it sound as though the answer to a clumsy logging facility is simply to add another heavy layer of complexity. Surely not every application needs OpenTelemetry. Why can’t logger().info() just work in a sensible way? This can't be such a hard problem, can it? Every other language and framework does it! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | conor- 5 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> Why can’t logger().info() just work in a sensible way? I think OTEL is pretty sensible for a vendor-free and if you want to have a console logger you can use the console exporter[0] for debug mode during local development. Also if Next is designed as a framework to make it easy to build production-grade apps, having a standardized way to implement o11y with OTEL is a worthwhile tradeoff? If you view that as being overkill, perhaps you're not the target audience of the framework [0] https://opentelemetry.io/docs/languages/js/exporters/#consol... | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|