Closed devinrhode2 closed 2 years ago
Thanks for the suggestion; I would be against a name change at this point. I think the current name (next-logger
) conveys the function of this library and is not misleading (for example, it isn't called next-winston-logger
, but uses pino
).
The library currently has 14,000+ weekly downloads; I would not want to put these existing integrations into a place where they have to deal with a renamed dependency.
The default implementation of this library is pino
, as a fast, popular choice for structured logging. However, it is not fundamentally restricted to pino
. With version 3.0.0
in January, custom logging functions can be used; so any object with error
, warn
, trace
and info
methods can be used for logging, not just pino
.
For example:
const winston = require('winston')
const logger = winston.createLogger({...})
const logger = () => ({
error: logger.error,
warn: logger.warn,
trace: logger.trace,
info: logger.info
})
I think fundamental to next-logger, is the fact that it assumes you are using pino, right?
The biggest value I see in it is mapping console and nextLogger methods to pino methods, and also (trying) to mapping args accordingly, so it's very intrinsic to pino.