SV: Nagios 2.0 stable

[Sean Dilda]

jeff vier wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 10:31 -0500, Sean Dilda wrote:

> 
> 
>>For most projects, terms like 'alpha' and 'beta' have certain meanings 
>>in regards to how stable/tested the code is and how likely it is to 
>>change before final release.  And likewise, official releases tend to 
>>not do things like drastically change the config layout as part of a 
>>bugfix, whereas an alpha or beta might.
> 
> 
> Oh?  As I said before, how is it that "stable" code from [some]
> commercial companies have so many more problems than beta [and sometimes
> alpha] code from the OSS community?

I don't only care about stability in terms of if the program crashes/has 
bugs.  I also care about stability in terms of lack of code churn.  I've 
seen several betas before where functionality is added or removed 
between the beta and the final release.  In addition to this, there's 
also the possibility for subtle but important changes in the behavior of 
the program.

I do do a lot of testing before I put something like nagios into 
production.  And with nagios especially, part of that is figuring out 
the best use of the features it offers and how to setup my configs.  I 
don't know about you, but the only way I can keep myself sane with 
nagios configs is to write my own config generator.  Some of the 
configuration setup has changed between 1.2 and 2.0b2.  As such to 
switch to it I'd have to sit down and reconfigure out the best way to do 
my configs.  And there's also the possibility that the config setup 
might change again before 2.0 final, and I'd rather only have to fix my 
configs for 2.x once.

> 
> 
>>You may have no problems with it, and that's great.  However, there are 
>>people out there whose job performance is tied to how well stuff like 
>>this operates.  As such, they tend to make the wise choice of waiting 
>>for an official release before investing time setting up something and 
>>risking having to completely change your setup in a couple of weeks.  To 
>>many professionals, having an official (as opposed to beta) release is 
>>an indication from the developers that this code is ready for prime time 
>>and will have bugfixes that don't cause you to rework things.
> 
> 
> So test it.
> Are you saying you'd do a blind deployment because Ethan says "I think
> it's fine"?

Look above, no.  What I'm saying is that I don't have time to test the 
beta AND the final release.  Other people (like yourself) do, and I'm 
glad they do.  Because it means that when 2.0 final comes out it will be 
a better product.  But just because you and several others on here have 
the time to test it and fix the bugs you find, doesn't mean everyone 
else does.  As such, you shouldn't act like 1.2 is obsolete and people 
should switch to 2.0, because for many of us, 2.0 isn't even an option 
until the actual non-beta 2.0 release happens.


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Microsoft Mobile & Embedded DevCon 2005
Attend MEDC 2005 May 9-12 in Vegas. Learn more about the latest Windows
Embedded(r) & Windows Mobile(tm) platforms, applications & content.  Register
by 3/29 & save $300 http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6883&alloc_id=15149&op=click
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. 
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null