Gary E. Miller via devel <devel@ntpsec.org>: > On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 16:02:00 -0600 > Ian Bruene via devel <devel@ntpsec.org> wrote: > > > The only real blocker that I can see at this time is the need for > > broad testing. [reiteration of me requesting testers / reviewers goes > > here.] > > OTOH, people will not test it until it is easy to test. So I'd suggest > putting it in 1.0.1, and mark "experimental".
Good plan.
Ian, you have an unusual degree of freedom in this situation. SNMP would
be nice to ship in a checklist-feature sort of way, but it's not urgent.
By your account it needs some polishing, but is unlikely to break in any
obvious and horrible way. By marking it "experimental" we can mitigate the
reputation risk if it does.
Taken all together, this means there isn't really any wrong decision,
just alternatives that are all low-risk and low-gain. In the longer
term the gain might be higher as more people find it useful, but that's not
now.
So...you get to tell us if it's ready, and commit the change to
include in the tarball if it is. Don't sweat the decision, you
have more important things to spend your think time on.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
My work is funded by the Internet Civil Engineering Institute: https://icei.org
Please visit their site and donate: the civilization you save might be your own.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
