Logging fixes

[trexfeathers]

🚀 Pull Request

Description

Improvements to all uses of logging in experimental.ugrid, following recent team discoveries.

---

Consult Iris pull request check list

[pp-mo]

Useful improvements you've made here.
But on the testing side, I couldn't avoid thinking about how to improve this so I went digging and experimenting.
I came up with a possible way here : https://github.com/pp-mo/iris/pull/68/files

Don't want to undermine the work here, but I think the test changes are looking messy.
Would you consider incorporating into this PR the above extension to the assertLogs method ??
I do still have some concerns about the completeness of that aproach, though : see pp-mo#68

[trexfeathers]

Don't want to undermine the work here, but I think the test changes are looking messy.

3cf6662 Does this help at all?

Would you consider incorporating into this PR the above extension to the assertLogs method ??

bfbed13 I can confirm from local testing that this addresses the issue you originally identified.

I do still have some concerns about the completeness of that aproach, though

I get what you're saying, however this area is new to us and we have addressed all issues we've encountered so far. No problem IMO.

[pp-mo]

Don't want to undermine the work here, but I think the test changes are looking messy.

3cf6662 Does this help at all?

I really meant the way we formerly had extra code to 'exercise' the logging before capturing + checking it.
So that is all squared away now 👍

Would you consider incorporating into this PR the above extension to the assertLogs method ??

bfbed13 I can confirm from local testing that this addresses the issue you originally identified.

Brilliant, thanks ! 💐

I do still have some concerns about the completeness of that aproach, though

I get what you're saying, however this area is new to us and we have addressed all issues
we've encountered so far. No problem IMO.

👍 I like your approach 😁

One thing that does still jar here, for me, is the repetition of the check_log method : we now have 4 copies (!)
I was very close to adding that (i.e. the regex check) into the new-version assertLogs, but I felt it was perhaps too much in one.
But what the hell, why not add an optional keyword like 'message_regex' + integrate the two?
The only snag, IMO, is that it only applies when you're expecting a single logged message. But naming/documentation can just allow for that.
See my suggestions (only partial changes : you will need to replace all the check_logs with assertLogs changes)

How does that way look to you @trexfeathers ?

[trexfeathers]

How does that way look to you @trexfeathers ?

Very nice idea @pp-mo! 5a997d3 should take care of this - involved a fair amount of refactoring but the result is simpler, a little more akin to AssertRaisesRegex(), which is what I was originally after anyway.

[pp-mo]

This all seems good to me now.
Thanks for sticking with it @trexfeathers