On 8/24/07, Chris Hoogendyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ok, I like mon. no bloat. no crud. just does the job. so, in a sense, > there's no real need for ongoing activity or development -- except that > the user documentation is sparse or non-existent. Oh, and the name. It > took me forever to stumble on mon. I'd been looking at hobbit, nagios, > etc. Searched many times over and wasn't satisfied. Even knowing about > mon, it's impossible to search for stuff related to it. Is it ever > mentioned on linuxquestions.org? on sunmanagers list? who knows? can't > filter for it. oh, but I did mention it the other day on linuxquestions, > so, yes, it is there.
Part of that I think is because once Mon is deployed somewhere, it doesn't really need to be modified, it just works, so it's probably installed in a lot of places and just humming along just fine, so you don't really hear about it. Mon is under active development, heck I just checked in a bunch of patches we had been running not too long ago: http://sourceforge.net/project/stats/detail.php?group_id=170&ugn=mon&type=cvs&mode=60day http://mon.cvs.sourceforge.net/mon/mon/ As you can see there is a lot of development in CVS, but there hasn't been an official release for a while; I'm sure when Jim wants to make an official release, then you'll see a lot more discussion about Mon, and maybe even some more developers. :) I thought the same way you did a few months ago, that the Mon project was dead, but it's not, it's just not very visibly alive. ;) -- Augie Schwer - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://schwer.us Key fingerprint = 9815 AE19 AFD1 1FE7 5DEE 2AC3 CB99 2784 27B0 C072 _______________________________________________ mon mailing list mon@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/mon
