2008/5/25 Magnus Fromreide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> * How to update README.agent-mibs when using the old/new feature?
My gut reaction is that README.agent-mibs should probably describe
the implementation of the default choices. So if a module re-write is
being trialled (using config_new_require), then this wouldn't appear
in the agent-mibs list.
If a module re-write has been included in the default build
(with config_old_release used to switch to the previous version),
then that'[s when it would appear in the agent-mibs list.
> * As it is now the list of excludes will be forever growing. Is
> there an interest in a config_provides(interface-name)?
If I've understood you correctly, the main difference between
these two mechanisms is that config_exclude() would list
the other module(s) that cover the same ground, while
config_provideds() would list a shared token. Is that correct?
In practise, these feel fairly similar. The main effect would seem
to be that config_provides() doesn't require the implementor to
know what other modules were affected (just the name of this
token). While config_exclude() *does* require the coder to list
the other modules explicitly.
Having a common token is probably more convenient, but I'm
inclined to say that if you're replacing another bit of code, you
ought to know exactly what you are replacing. So listing these
explicitly via config_excludes is good discipline.
> * Module initialization names - when making a new module then a
> new module name is needed and that changes the external
> interface of the agent. (-IusmUser vs. -IusmUser_5_5)
Unless you also rename the files :-)
(usmUser -> oldUsmUser, usmUser_5_5 -> usmUser)
But yes - that is a visible change.
Whether this a problem or not, I'm not sure.
> * I chose to add this as a config_old_require - I think that
> config_new_require should be used to merge this into V5-4 etc.
> save that config_new_require is missing there.
I'd originally intended to add the config_{old,new}_require tokens
to the 5.4.x branch, but the feeling of the March meeting seemed
to indicate that it should be main trunk only. We wouldn't
normally be introducing new features into the 5.4.x line at this
stage anyway. New stuff should probably be trialled in 5.5, and
made active in 5.6
Dave
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
