Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

version 0.9.9 /proposal/: #53

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

xarafaxz
Copy link

* Feature: Allowing use MIB-MODULE-NAME:: MODULE-NAME-SPACE:: et cetera in SnmpMibObject TLV which i strongly recommend
	that resolve problems with mibs name colision, for example: PacketCable/EuroPacketCable, Motorola/Compal enterprise mibs.
	you can use "-f" switch to include MIB-MODULE-NAME:: prefixes in config dump
* Feature: Allowing use C-style inline comments "//"
* Feature: Allow use custom mib for packetcable hash signing becasuse "-eu" / EuroPacketCable and "-na" PacketCable are not enough
	use "-H [MIB]" switch to set custom hash mib.
* Attempt to cleanup option parsing mess. Now option parsing is getopt based. However due to preserving option compatibility it is create another mess. Just slighty lesser, i think.

	* Feature: Allowing use MIB-MODULE-NAME:: MODULE-NAME-SPACE:: et cetera in SnmpMibObject TLV which i strongly recommend
		that resolve problems with mibs name colision, for example: PacketCable/EuroPacketCable, Motorola/Compal enterprise mibs.
		you can use "-f" switch to include MIB-MODULE-NAME:: prefixes in config dump
	* Feature: Allowing use C-style inline comments "//"
	* Feature: Allow use custom mib for packetcable hash signing becasuse "-eu" / EuroPacketCable and "-na" PacketCable are not enough
		use "-H [MIB]" switch to set custom hash mib.
	* Attempt to cleanup option parsing mess. Now option parsing is getopt based. However due to preserving option compatibility it is create another mess. Just slighty lesser, i think.
@rlaager
Copy link
Owner

rlaager commented Feb 24, 2017

This should be at least four pull requests, one for each feature.

@AdrianSimionov
Copy link
Collaborator

For each feature (pull request) I would recommend to also update README.md with a short description if the usage is changing. This helps users understand how to use the tool.

@xarafaxz
Copy link
Author

This should be at least four pull requests, one for each feature.

Well that's a lot of work. And only inline config comments are easly separable. Getopt based parsing influence everything else. For example to separate: custom mib hashing i need to write old style parsing, and then cleans it up in another patch.

Also the whole patch is tested with internal project tests, my internals, and use productively. If i split it into four i need to test every one as a separate.

@xarafaxz
Copy link
Author

For each feature (pull request) I would recommend to also update README.md with a short description if the usage is changing. This helps users understand how to use the tool.

Currently command line parsing should be fully compatible with older version (0.9.8), so no user intervention is required.

Changing command line options should be discused separatly.

@AdrianSimionov
Copy link
Collaborator

Well that's a lot of work.

I am not going anywhere. I am looking forward to it as some are something I had in mind for a long time but never did it, for example the getopt feature.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants