[Xymon] RES: Is the xymon Dead? Future

[Japheth Cleaver]

On 3/11/2019 6:59 AM, SebA wrote:
>
> On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 15:09, Axel Beckert <abe at deuxchevaux.org 
> <mailto:abe at deuxchevaux.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>     And with regards to being dead or not: Development greatly sped up
>     when J.C. Cleaver took over release management, but it indeed seems to
>     have stalled a little bit again. Then again, IIRC J.C. mostly took
>     over release management so that Henrik can focus on long-time
>     development. And if there is not much to fix in the current stable
>     releases, not having a stable release every few months is not
>     necessarily "dead", but might also be "stable, no relevant open
>     issues".
>
>
> 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.

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.

        (And yes, I'm still hoping and waiting for IPv6 support, too,
        especially in xymonnet-based checks. Reporting to IPv6-only
        servers is
        no issue though, if you anyways use stunnel to encrypt the
        client-reporting traffic.)

                         Kind regards, Axel

    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

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.

Regards,
-jc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.xymon.com/pipermail/xymon/attachments/20190311/81c3cdf7/attachment.html>