@kriation Instead of leaving the opening comment of a Pull Request empty and opening a related issue-ticket, it is better if the PR's raison d'être is contained within the PR itself.

However, if you're submitting a PR to resolve an existing issue ticket, you can include
Closes <Issue No.> in the opening component.

I don't have a sample site at hand to test this manually. Can you please post screenshots of the debug output from this change?
Thanks.

Can you please post screenshots of the debug output from this change? - @ashmaroli

Attached!

If this is is accepted, this should be documented on the README.

There are couple of things immediately apparent from the screenshot:

• This adds additional noise to an already noisy verbose output. 🙄 Imagine what the output would be for a site with hundreds of posts..
• categories should be debugged as with category: #{title} not tag:
• Jekyll.logger.debug has been called with just a single parameter instead of two (missing comma between the two strings..)

All in all, I'm not in favor of this proposal. Sorry.

@ashmaroli IIUC this will only be output when you use --debug flag, not by default right?

will only be output when you use --debug flag

Yes, that is correct. I was thinking maybe instead of piping into the default debug output, it'd be better if these output was triggered via an additional configuration... For example,

jekyll-archives:
  debug: true

But that needs to be approved by other maintainers first.

@ashmaroli - I'm happy to make the changes you mentioned.

With regard to noisy verbose output, isn't verbosity verbose by design?

Without this logic, resolving issues (as I did) would take considerably longer as there are no other mechanisms to debug what is being processed in this plugin.

noisy verbose output, isn't verbosity verbose by design? ...
...no other mechanisms to debug what is being processed

Unfortunately, true, to both questions.
Perhaps you can use a private helper to iterate through the list of posts and log each post to the debug output..

resolving issues (as I did)

What exactly was that issue?

Perhaps you can use a private helper to iterate through the list of posts and log each post to the debug output..

How is this different than using the debug logger?

What exactly was that issue?

Nuance in how I specified tags in post front matter.

How is this different than using the debug logger?

Greater control and flexibility.. For example:

def read_tags
  if enabled? "tags"
    tags.each do |title, posts|
      debug_key(posts, title, "tag")
      @archives << Archive.new(@site, title, "tag", posts)
    end
  end
end

private

def debug_key(posts, title, key)
  posts.each do |post|
    debug "Processing #{post.relative_path} with #{key}: #{title}"
  end
end

def debug_date(...)
  ...
end

def debug(msg)
  return unless site.config.dig("jekyll_archives", "debug")
  Jekyll.logger.debug "Archives:", msg
end

Disclaimer: The above example needs to be optimized further..

Understood! I'll update my branch with the changes.

I'll update my branch with the changes.

I was hoping for some inputs or approval of that idea from one of the other maintainers before you made additional changes..
Either ways, the config key for this plugin is jekyll-archives instead of jekyll_archives in my example.
ref: https://github.com/jekyll/jekyll-archives/blob/master/docs/configuration.md

The debug output should only be displayed when using the --debug option

@DirtyF That's how it is already. Jekyll.logger.debug cannot output in default level (:info)

@DirtyF What is your opinion on resolving RuboCop offenses on this branch by using the example in #144 (comment) as a guide..?

fine by me

@kriation Thank you for bring this PR up to date. But my requests for changes still remains.. I'll approve if you're able to refactor this to meet the following:

• The proposed debug output is an opt-in — users have to explicitly enable {"jekyll-archives"=>{ "debug"=>true}} via their config file.
• Have the above documented in the docs/configuration.md file.
• Extract the debugging logic into a private method that prints each archive entry in a new line. For example:

          Archives: Processing documents with the tag: 'foobar'
                    _posts/2018-05-06-hello-world.markdown
                    _posts/2018-05-08-hello-again.markdown
                    _posts/2018-05-12-the-truth-is-out-there.markdown
                    _posts/2019-06-07-hold-the-door.markdown
                    _posts/2019-07-14-truth-justice-and-stuff.markdown
                    _posts/2020-07-04-static-is-the-new-black.markdown
          Archives: Processing documents with the category: 'lipsum'
                    _posts/2018-05-06-hello-world.markdown
                    _posts/2018-05-08-hello-again.markdown
                    _posts/2018-05-12-the-truth-is-out-there.markdown
                    _posts/2019-06-07-hold-the-door.markdown
                    _posts/2019-07-14-truth-justice-and-stuff.markdown
                    _posts/2020-07-04-static-is-the-new-black.markdown
          Archives: Processing documents in the year: '2019'
                    _posts/2019-06-07-hold-the-door.markdown
                    _posts/2019-07-14-truth-justice-and-stuff.markdown
          Archives: Processing documents in the month: '2018/05'
                    _posts/2018-05-06-hello-world.markdown
                    _posts/2018-05-08-hello-again.markdown
                    _posts/2018-05-12-the-truth-is-out-there.markdown
          Archives: Processing documents from the day: '2018/05/06'
                    _posts/2018-05-06-hello-world.markdown

@ashmaroli Absolutely! I noticed earlier this week that the original commits were well behind the existing mainline, so this last commit was to bring it up to par. I'll take a stab at implementing your changes and will add it to the commit list for this PR.