On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 00:29 +0100, Thomas Anders wrote: > > The one thing that I'd suggest is that we don't actually > > release another 5.2.2 tarball (whether rc4 or pre4), until > > the new snmpnetstat code is in place - assuming that's the > > way we're going to play things. > > I'm confused now. Are you finally proposing to come up with a 5.2.x > backport of your 5.3.x snmpnetstat rewrite?
*I'm* not proposing to do that, no - I'm still working on the basic rewrite. But that felt to be the general consensus on IRC yesterday. What I'm saying here is that we should agree on what we're going to do wrt snmpnetstat on 5.2.2 AND DO IT - *before* releasing another rc tarball. The whole point of a release candidate is that it's complete, and (hopefully) ready to release. If we *know* that we're going to need to craft another one, what's the point of rushing something out prematurely. > If so, will the backport > mimic the former snmpnetstat options or use the same as in 5.3? If we're going to ship the new code with 5.2.2, then it *MUST* be hacked to use the original command options, IMO. There is no excuse for breaking compatibility in a bug-fix line, just because we're too lazy to tweak the code appropriately. If no-one is prepared to do the necessary work, then we should omit this tool altogether. Dave ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
