--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 4 Jan 2021 12:35:29 -0500
Bill Fenner via tcpdump-workers <tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org>

> I just wanted to share some of my thinking about how to proceed with
> the truncation-related changes on the road to 5.0.0.
> 1. Improve code coverage for the printer that's being modified.  (This
> ensures that the code being modified has a corresponding test pcap
> that can be used by steps 2 and 3).

Hello Bill.

It used to be 31 test in tcpdump 4.3.0, now it is 571 test, and the
coverage is still very far from complete, even more so for less common
protocols. There is a steady consensus that it would be nice to have
more tests, contributions are welcome as always.

> 2. Use the trunc-o-matic tool from

Thank you for proposing this new tool. I see a potential for false
positives, let me have some time to try it and to see if that's actually
the case.

> I also think that community members would be willing to chip in if the
> effort was coordinated (e.g., open a github ticket for each printer
> that needs this conversion, have a wiki page that talks about the
> conversion process, etc.).  There's no need for the maintainers to
> take on the work of all of the protocols.

You mean well, but let me suggest after you walk a mile in these
particular shoes you'll prefer a different wording, or maybe even a
different idea.

Francois-Xavier started this thread in September 2020 on the assumption
that community members will want to contribute. It is January 2021 and
except myself you are the first ever to discuss, thank you. Let's
concur that in foreseeable future there will be a meaningful amount of
work that will be never done unless the project maintainers do it.

This conversion is an example of such work and it is especially
labour-demanding one. Francois-Xavier has done most of the
longjmp()-associated work so far, so he has the most say in this
particular matter and tcpdump 4.99.0 should have his name on it. He
proposes to continue the source code conversion, and to me it makes the
most sense.

That said, if you find it more important to propose a text with a
"definition of done", is would likely remain relevant after the
conversion. It could fit well in or around the CONTRIBUTING file.
A separate ticket for every file to me seems to be not worth the
hassle considering how few people need to coordinate now. That said, a
weekly/fortnightly status update on the list could be a useful addition.


    Denis Ovsienko

--- End Message ---
tcpdump-workers mailing list

Reply via email to