Re: [Mon-devel] process_event in mon-1-0-0pre1 branch

[David N. <vit...@cm...>]

--On Friday, July 09, 2004 8:58 AM -0700 Jim Trocki <tr...@tr...> 
wrote:

> On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, David Nolan wrote:
>
>> Out of curiousity, why did you decide to do this work in the 1.0 branch?
>> I  think significant changes like this should probably go into directly
>> into  Mon 1.1, especially since I'd like to see a 1.1-dev* release
>> "soon".
>
> because:
>
>     -it fixed major brokenness that people have reported
>     -it wasn't a ton of work
>     -it didn't add major features or change the behavior of anything
>      (other than fixing brokenness)
>     -it made the code easier to maintain
>


Ok, those reasons are perfectly reasonable.

> i'm trying to fix up this 1.0.0 branch so that it can be released in
> very good shape. after that happens i'll leave it go and do nothing
> more with it than fix bugs, and future work will be on the head branch.
> i think the 1.0.0 point is really close, and the only other changes to
> it i'm really looking to make is to incorporate mon.cgi, maybe pick a
> monitors or two from contrib, and touch up the docs.
>

Hmm, I should look at my copy of mon.cgi and figure out if any of our local 
patches are interesting.  I think the answer is yes, but only for Mon 1.1.

And I should do the same for my various monitor scripts.  I think there
are some that will be of general use.  (krb5, imap-ssl, powerware UPS, 
cisco router health monitoring, etc.)


> nothing in 1.0.0 should hold up a 1.1 release, really. after all, it's
> the "development" branch.
>

I haven't looked at these changes yet, but I'll probably try to integrate 
them over the weekend.

-David

David Nolan                    <*>                    vit...@cm...
curses: May you be forced to grep the termcap of an unclean yacc while
      a herd of rogue emacs fsck your troff and vgrind your pathalias!