chore: change logging structure

[LukeWeidenwalker]

Follow-up to conversation in Open-EO/openeo-python-client#434 (comment)

@clausmichele what do you think about this structure instead?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #128 (10f87b5) into main (1b6e369) will decrease coverage by 1.21%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #128      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   77.84%   76.63%   -1.21%     
==========================================
  Files          25       25              
  Lines        1020     1070      +50     
==========================================
+ Hits          794      820      +26     
- Misses        226      250      +24     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...processes_dask/process_implementations/__init__.py	76.47% <ø> (ø)
...neo_processes_dask/process_implementations/core.py	97.56% <100.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[clausmichele]

@LukeWeidenwalker:

1. I would init the logger before the try imports, where we also use the logger.
2. It would be nice to allow the init of the log_format and of the level by the user, if they would like to specify a different format or set the level differently from INFO.

[soxofaan]

I would init the logger before the try imports, where we also use the logger.

As mentioned above: a library should never initialize loggers, especially not during/before imports. That's the responsibility of an application or entrypoint script.

It would be nice to allow the init of the log_format and of the level by the user, if they would like to specify a different format or set the level differently from INFO.

That's one of the reasons it should not be done magically by a library: to give the user/application the proper opportunity to set up the logging as desired.