Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

That is a very useful list. What I would recommend though is we should finish dealing with the #ifdef hell and replacing autotools with cmake first. That way if we have to onboard new people to the project they are dealing with the "cleaned-up" code base. On Sun, May 13, 2018, at 6:37 PM,

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On Sun, 13 May 2018 18:15:16 -0700 Keith wrote: KM> On Sun, May 13, 2018, at 3:41 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: KM> > Should a list of to-do items be added to the Net-SNMP wiki? KM> KM> I think a to-do wiki page on github would be a good idea to KM> deal with what needs to be done. Then, as each

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On Sun, May 13, 2018, at 3:41 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 04/12/18 08:31, Ian Bruene wrote: > > This morning we (Keith, Ian) met with an assortment of the NET-SNMP > > developers / contributors (primarily Bart Van Assche) to discuss how we > > could best help the project. The meeting went

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On 04/12/18 08:31, Ian Bruene wrote: This morning we (Keith, Ian) met with an assortment of the NET-SNMP developers / contributors (primarily Bart Van Assche) to discuss how we could best help the project. The meeting went well, at least form our perspective. The pain points we identified

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

Wes, On Thu, May 10, 2018, at 4:12 PM, Wes Hardaker wrote: > Keith Mendoza writes: > > > I would very much like to be part of the discussion regarding moving > > to Github if its amenable to you guys. > > Sorry for the delay on this; I had a week and a half of constant special

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

Keith Mendoza writes: > I would very much like to be part of the discussion regarding moving > to Github if its amenable to you guys. Sorry for the delay on this; I had a week and a half of constant special meetings that took me away from mail. I'm going to post an announcement

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018, at 7:53 PM, Wes Hardaker wrote: > Robert Story writes: > > |> That discussion is going on over on our admin list. It's not just a > |> few of us running amok. ;-) First, I meant no disrespect when I said "I think it would be best to get full

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

Robert Story writes: |> That discussion is going on over on our admin list. It's not just a |> few of us running amok. ;-) Specifically, there are a bunch of pieces that we're considering individually. We'll definitely move the repository, we're definitely going to start

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On Wed, 25 Apr 2018 13:24:12 -0700 Keith wrote: KM> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, at 12:08 PM, Robert Story wrote: KM> > We've had recent discussions on this, and I think we'll be KM> > moving the source to github in the near future. KM> KM> I think it would be best to get full agreement from the team

RE: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

To: Bart Van Assche <bvanass...@acm.org> Cc: Susan Sons <su...@icei.org>; net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net; Robert Story <rst...@freesnmp.com> Subject: Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI Bart Van Assche <bvanass...@acm.org>: > Which of the following f

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

Bart Van Assche : > Which of the following files under include/net-snmp/system do you think are > still relevant today? No changes other than trivial changes have been made > to these files in the past ten years: > > dynix.h irix.h osf5.h svr5.h ultrix.h LOL. I've seen this

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On 04/25/18 13:08, Robert Story wrote: IB> * clean up headers in /include/net-snmp/system/ which are a IB> mess and have import loops IB> IB> * #ifdef hell / too many supported configurations I'm a little nervous about these one, especially with folks that are new to the code base. And as far

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

Robert Story : >And as far as supported configurations, we're > very big on backwards compatibility. I think you are spending more effort on this than field conditions justify. And there is a cost you probably have not audited. I learned my Unix

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, at 12:08 PM, Robert Story wrote: > On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 10:31:13 -0500 Ian wrote: > IB> This morning we (Keith, Ian) met with an assortment of the > IB> NET-SNMP developers / contributors (primarily Bart Van Assche) > IB> to discuss how we could best help the project. The

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On 04/25/2018 02:08 PM, Robert Story wrote: On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 10:31:13 -0500 Ian wrote: IB> * clean up headers in /include/net-snmp/system/ which are a IB> mess and have import loops IB> IB> * #ifdef hell / too many supported configurations I'm a little nervous about these one, especially

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 10:31:13 -0500 Ian wrote: IB> This morning we (Keith, Ian) met with an assortment of the IB> NET-SNMP developers / contributors (primarily Bart Van Assche) IB> to discuss how we could best help the project. The meeting went IB> well, at least form our perspective. I'm sorry I

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, at 2:18 PM, Magnus Fromreide wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:19:35PM -0700, Keith Mendoza wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, at 10:03 AM, Bill Fenner wrote: > > > I'm sorry that I wasn't available for this meeting. I think one important > > > pain point is the overhead

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:19:35PM -0700, Keith Mendoza wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, at 10:03 AM, Bill Fenner wrote: > > I'm sorry that I wasn't available for this meeting. I think one important > > pain point is the overhead of doing releases - 5.7.3 was years ago and > > there are very useful

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, at 10:03 AM, Bill Fenner wrote: > I'm sorry that I wasn't available for this meeting. I think one important > pain point is the overhead of doing releases - 5.7.3 was years ago and > there are very useful fixes in the 5.7 branch; why can't we just say "now's > a good time

Re: Summary of meeting between NET-SNMP devs and ICEI

I'm sorry that I wasn't available for this meeting. I think one important pain point is the overhead of doing releases - 5.7.3 was years ago and there are very useful fixes in the 5.7 branch; why can't we just say "now's a good time for 5.7.4 and if we don't get it right then we can release 5.7.5