Re: [Nagios-devel] The nagios community wants to keep its open soul
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:38 pm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Ericsson [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 7:38 AM
> To: Nagios Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Nagios-devel] The nagios community wants to keep its open
> soul
>=20
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:00 PM, anthony paradis
> wrote:
> >
> > I expect a professional response from you
> >
>=20
> Is it just me who can picture Ethan giggling away at the keyboard while
> he was writing that email? Personally, I thought it was hilarious :
>=20
> But alright, I'll come in with a professional response here.
>=20
> Most software projects expect the users who want features in the core
> code to develop those features themselves and submit patches that
> can be discussed and polished to perfection. The Nagios community
> works a bit differently. Users are crying out for new features,
> although
> they're often not very specific about what those features are supposed
> to be, and even more rarely users post patches to make that particular
> feature happen.
>=20
> It's really quite simple. If you have a feature you want implemented,
> you can
> a) submit a patch to make it happen.
> b) whine.
A few months ago, I went through the process for A. In early November, I p=
osted a query about an issue my company was having with service escalations=
and long-standing "warning" states. Gmane seems to be down right now, so =
I can't post a link to it, but original email sent to nagios-users 2009/11/=
05 at around 6:49PM PST, subject "Escalate after X warnings or critical." =
The feature I wanted didn't exist, so I downloaded the source and patched i=
t in myself.
On 2009/11/17, I posted a patch to nagios-devel, and updated it twice. Onc=
e at the request of Hendrik Baecker, and once to add my new configuration d=
irectives to the HTML docs. I have heard nothing about the possible inclusi=
on or exclusion of this patch to the mainline tree since then, although I d=
id specifically ask if there was a step I had missed that was preventing my=
patch from being considered.
I understand that my patch was unsolicited, and may not be in the direction=
that Nagios wishes to go, but the complete lack of response was rather irk=
some to me (and is somewhat related the "Ethan doesn't listen" complaints t=
hat pop up from time to time). If the Nagios team had rejected my patch an=
d given a reason (not in the right direction, no testing, breaks case foo, =
etc.), it would give me a direction to go in regards to eventually integrat=
ing my patch. As it stands now, I have to maintain my own private fork ind=
efinitely because I simply don't know whether my patch is going to be accep=
ted upstream.
Just my experience here.
Mark Gius
This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]
> From: Andreas Ericsson [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 7:38 AM
> To: Nagios Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Nagios-devel] The nagios community wants to keep its open
> soul
>=20
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:00 PM, anthony paradis
> wrote:
> >
> > I expect a professional response from you
> >
>=20
> Is it just me who can picture Ethan giggling away at the keyboard while
> he was writing that email? Personally, I thought it was hilarious :
>=20
> But alright, I'll come in with a professional response here.
>=20
> Most software projects expect the users who want features in the core
> code to develop those features themselves and submit patches that
> can be discussed and polished to perfection. The Nagios community
> works a bit differently. Users are crying out for new features,
> although
> they're often not very specific about what those features are supposed
> to be, and even more rarely users post patches to make that particular
> feature happen.
>=20
> It's really quite simple. If you have a feature you want implemented,
> you can
> a) submit a patch to make it happen.
> b) whine.
A few months ago, I went through the process for A. In early November, I p=
osted a query about an issue my company was having with service escalations=
and long-standing "warning" states. Gmane seems to be down right now, so =
I can't post a link to it, but original email sent to nagios-users 2009/11/=
05 at around 6:49PM PST, subject "Escalate after X warnings or critical." =
The feature I wanted didn't exist, so I downloaded the source and patched i=
t in myself.
On 2009/11/17, I posted a patch to nagios-devel, and updated it twice. Onc=
e at the request of Hendrik Baecker, and once to add my new configuration d=
irectives to the HTML docs. I have heard nothing about the possible inclusi=
on or exclusion of this patch to the mainline tree since then, although I d=
id specifically ask if there was a step I had missed that was preventing my=
patch from being considered.
I understand that my patch was unsolicited, and may not be in the direction=
that Nagios wishes to go, but the complete lack of response was rather irk=
some to me (and is somewhat related the "Ethan doesn't listen" complaints t=
hat pop up from time to time). If the Nagios team had rejected my patch an=
d given a reason (not in the right direction, no testing, breaks case foo, =
etc.), it would give me a direction to go in regards to eventually integrat=
ing my patch. As it stands now, I have to maintain my own private fork ind=
efinitely because I simply don't know whether my patch is going to be accep=
ted upstream.
Just my experience here.
Mark Gius
This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]