The nagios community wants to keep its open soul

[Andreas Ericsson]

On 02/26/2010 11:38 PM, Gius, Mark wrote:
>> -----Original Message----- From: Andreas Ericsson
>> 
>> 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 posted 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 it in myself.
> 

Cool. Sorry to have missed it, though patches and RFE's should
definitely go to nagios-devel. I know I hardly ever have the time
to browse through all the threads on nagios-users at least, and
I'm sure Ethan and Ton feel the same.

> On 2009/11/17, I posted a patch to nagios-devel, and updated it
> twice.  Once at the request of Hendrik Baecker, and once to add my
> new configuration directives to the HTML docs. I have heard nothing
> about the possible inclusion or exclusion of this patch to the
> mainline tree since then, although I did specifically ask if there
> was a step I had missed that was preventing my patch from being
> considered.
> 

Would this be one adding a new variable to the object structs? If
so, I'm not surprised it didn't get through, since that would break
the ABI for all modules and thus require a minor version bump as
well as a re-compile of all running modules.

You should have gotten a response though, but see below please.

> 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 irksome to me (and is somewhat related the "Ethan doesn't
> listen" complaints that pop up from time to time).  If the Nagios
> team had rejected my patch and 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 integrating my patch.  As it
> stands now, I have to maintain my own private fork indefinitely
> because I simply don't know whether my patch is going to be accepted
> upstream.
> 
> Just my experience here.
> 

That's unfortunate. If you find the thread again, post something in
it and I'll have a look at it. I personally didn't read a lot of
nagios-devel mail before christmas as I had too much vacation left
over and had to take it out late last year. We also had a deadline
somewhere around there.

In general though, I try to respond to all patches unless Ton does
it. However, I'm human and I do make mistakes. A reminder (preferrably
in the thread you started to send the patch) would probably have
made me take a look at it.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson at op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and
terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war
on peace.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev