<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/11/2019 6:59 AM, SebA wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAOGA453RkDN+4SCQ=itO85v43cB7YOEQbZG4Kr7xkDPzq=w=HA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><span style="FONT-SIZE:12px"><span
style="FONT-FAMILY:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span></span></div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 15:09,
Axel Beckert <<a href="mailto:abe@deuxchevaux.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">abe@deuxchevaux.org</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Well another option is just to convert the repo on SF
from SVN to Git, but keep it hosted on SF. And then also to
enable the bugs and patches area - if someone is going to
monitor and maintain those areas. I have seen SF projects
where no-one does. But most active FLOSS projects are on
GitHub these days.<br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
And with regards to being dead or not: Development greatly
sped up<br>
when J.C. Cleaver took over release management, but it
indeed seems to<br>
have stalled a little bit again. Then again, IIRC J.C.
mostly took<br>
over release management so that Henrik can focus on
long-time<br>
development. And if there is not much to fix in the current
stable<br>
releases, not having a stable release every few months is
not<br>
necessarily "dead", but might also be "stable, no relevant
open<br>
issues".<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Yes, development did greatly speed up, but it practically
ceased when J.C., I think, found difficulty merging the
patches he had been using in his RPMs with Henrik's new 4.4
code. Or over 2 years ago (Jan 2016) when he released
4.3.28. I know the idea was that Henrik could focus on
long-time development, but I think that ceased over 3 years
ago - his last commit was in Jan 2016, with the last
development type commit being Dec 2015. Both of them
changed jobs (Henrik in Aug 2013 and J.C. in Sep 2015) and
I'm guessing no longer used, or needed to develop, Xymon in
their new roles and then their desire or capacity to keep
putting time into the project dwindled.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a fair criticism, unfortunately. The primary issue for me
since then has been having access to sufficiently high-throughput
performance and load testing, which had been a significant aspect
of the feature and dev cycle. I'd been hesitant to release further
absent a true shakedown of the new code, however that was /never/
intended to be an indication of lack of interest in the project.
It had seemed to have gotten to a point where a lot of the
low-hanging fruit had been hit and there was -- once again -- a
large delta in the jump to the prospective next release -- in
fact, which I feel was similar to the previous stall.<br>
</p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
(And yes, I'm still hoping and waiting for IPv6 support, too,<br>
especially in xymonnet-based checks. Reporting to IPv6-only
servers is<br>
no issue though, if you anyways use stunnel to encrypt the<br>
client-reporting traffic.)<br>
<br>
Kind regards, Axel<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
And I'm still hoping for TLS support in the client. I did try
https URL as the recipient (which should work - r7797) but I
couldn't get it to work in the RPM version</blockquote>
<p>Knowing that there is still actually a demand for IPv6 is
helpful. Simply put, what's most needed right now is a potentially
large testbed for testing and validation of the code we have.<br>
</p>
<p>Regards,<br>
-jc<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>