Hi John, I've been looking at this submission from the start, and frankly I don't like it. It is like Ronnie says in http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1957#c4, this code is very hard to read, let alone maintain. I don't want to sign off on that and burden myself and other with the maintenance chores. So I left it alone for another core developer to eventually pick it up. It seems none is confident enough to commit it.
Thanx, Jaap John R. Hogerhuis wrote: > Jeff Morriss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> >> Paul Dietrich wrote: >>> I saw a dissector for LLRP submitted a few months back. Does anyone >>> know the status? There are several vendors out with LLRP devices that >>> could really benefit from wireshark support. >> Looks like the request is still pending. You might want to subscribe >> yourself to the bug: >> >> http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1957 >> >> so you'll automatically be notified as the request progresses. >> > > > Hmm... last I heard the feedback to the author of the plugin was "be patient" > and that you have to wait until someone takes an interest in the dissector > before it would make it into WS. > > So all of us RFID types can subscribe to this bug but given no apparent > interest > in this protocol by the core devs I guess we'll be waiting forever. > > Frankly, that's no way to treat contributors. > > Do I mischaracterize the situation? Is there some other event that is holding > up > this issue? > > -- John. > _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
