From: Hiren P. <hir...@gm...> - 2010-04-28 19:52:18
|
would the team be interested in merging features/functions of dnx into icinga? -- Hiren Patel <hir...@gm...> |
From: William L. <wi...@le...> - 2010-05-04 18:29:41
|
DNX is all open-source and GNU license so you should feel free to integrate it into your package if you believe it to be of interest to your users. But DNX working preferentially with you would imply support for your forked package over nagios which is not what I expect people like to see. My opinion of course. On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Hiren Patel <hir...@gm...> wrote: > would the team be interested in merging features/functions of dnx into icinga? > > -- > Hiren Patel <hir...@gm...> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Dnx-devel mailing list > Dnx...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dnx-devel > |
From: Eric S. <eri...@co...> - 2010-05-05 21:15:42
|
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> I think I've stumbled across the icinga project before, the website looks familiar. How does the feature set compare with Ninja/Merlin or the "op5 monitor appliance" hosted at op5.org?<br> <br> Your feature list for icinga includes a brief blurb about "redundancy with distributed monitoring" ... how exactly is that implemented now? I assume that you're looking to integrate DNX with icinga to improve upon what method you're already using? Does icinga provide redundancy/load-balancing for the master nagios server?<br> <br> Eric Schoeller<br> <br> William Leibzon wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:z2z...@ma..." type="cite"> <pre wrap="">DNX is all open-source and GNU license so you should feel free to integrate it into your package if you believe it to be of interest to your users. But DNX working preferentially with you would imply support for your forked package over nagios which is not what I expect people like to see. My opinion of course. On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Hiren Patel <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:hir...@gm..."><hir...@gm...></a> wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">would the team be interested in merging features/functions of dnx into icinga? -- Hiren Patel <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:hir...@gm..."><hir...@gm...></a> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Dnx-devel mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Dnx...@li...">Dnx...@li...</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dnx-devel">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dnx-devel</a> </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""><!----> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Dnx-devel mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Dnx...@li...">Dnx...@li...</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dnx-devel">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dnx-devel</a> </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html> |
From: Hiren P. <hir...@gm...> - 2010-05-06 06:01:09
|
On Wed, 05 May 2010 15:18:35 -0600 Eric Schoeller <esc...@us...> wrote: > I think I've stumbled across the icinga project before, the website looks familiar. How does the feature set compare with Ninja/Merlin or the "op5 monitor appliance" hosted at op5.org? > hi, I've just joined the project, icinga is a fork of nagios 3, hoping to bring in feature requests and improvements at a faster pace than nagios. I'm not too familiar with the op5 product, but those implemented as nagios neb modules will work with icinga, as the core hasn't changed enough yet. > Your feature list for icinga includes a brief blurb about "redundancy with distributed monitoring" ... how exactly is that implemented now? I assume that you're looking to integrate DNX with icinga to improve upon what method you're already using? Does icinga provide redundancy/load-balancing for the master nagios server? > currently icinga core is mostly the nagios core 3 with some bug fixes, no other major features (aside from ido database stuff) has gone in. there are discussions on the devel list about improving the core performance, and bringing in distributed monitoring as a core feature (instead of the official active/passive solution, or by using modules). > Have you tried using DNX with icinga yet? Depending on your fork of nagios, it might just work :) > personally not as yet, but I'm confident that it will work, core hasn't changed enough to break neb module support. we like what dnx does, and were thinking of bringing those features into the core, instead of neb modules, as a default way of icinga doing checks. if we were to do this, we'd definitely prefer dnx developers joining in, instead of constantly watching for developments in dnx and then bringing those back info icinga. that was the reason I thought I'd see what the dnx developers think. thanks for the replies thus far. > Eric Schoeller > > William Leibzon wrote:DNX is all open-source and GNU license so you should feel free to > integrate it into your package if you believe it to be of interest to > your users. But DNX working preferentially with you would imply > support for your forked package over nagios which is not what I expect > people like to see. My opinion of course. > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Hiren Patel <hir...@gm...> wrote: > would the team be interested in merging features/functions of dnx into icinga? > |
From: Max <per...@we...> - 2010-05-12 20:36:27
|
> personally not as yet, but I'm confident that it will work, core hasn't changed enough to break neb module support. > we like what dnx does, and were thinking of bringing those features into the core, instead of neb modules, as a default way of icinga doing checks. > if we were to do this, we'd definitely prefer dnx developers joining in, instead of constantly watching for developments in dnx and then bringing those back info icinga. > that was the reason I thought I'd see what the dnx developers think. > thanks for the replies thus far. So you want the DNX team to stop doing this as a NEB module and make it just be a part of Icinga core so that Nagios core and Nagios core related projects then cannot use it? That sounds like a very politically motivated move and I would suggest not doing it, having DNX usable by just Icinga will only make a number of people mad at the Icinga team. I'd suggest maintaining NEB compatibility and just having Icinga developers contribute to DNX instead. - max |
From: Hiren P. <hir...@gm...> - 2010-05-13 07:26:51
|
On Wed, 12 May 2010 16:35:59 -0400 Max <per...@we...> wrote: > > personally not as yet, but I'm confident that it will work, core hasn't changed enough to break neb module support. > > we like what dnx does, and were thinking of bringing those features into the core, instead of neb modules, as a default way of icinga doing checks. > > if we were to do this, we'd definitely prefer dnx developers joining in, instead of constantly watching for developments in dnx and then bringing those back info icinga. > > that was the reason I thought I'd see what the dnx developers think. > > thanks for the replies thus far. > > So you want the DNX team to stop doing this as a NEB module and make > it just be a part of Icinga core so that Nagios core and Nagios core > related projects then cannot use it? > > That sounds like a very politically motivated move and I would suggest > not doing it, having DNX usable by just Icinga will only make a number > of people mad at the Icinga team. > > I'd suggest maintaining NEB compatibility and just having Icinga > developers contribute to DNX instead. > okay fair enough. thanks for the responses. |