Re: new modules consensus

On Iau, 2004-08-12 at 14:06, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>  - gnome-nettool
>      The discussion about this could basically be summarised as:
>        A: its a geek tool, it doesn't belong in the desktop
>        B: user's are really only expected to use this with an admin's 
>           guidance, so its not a problem
>      Jody, Seth, Calum and I seemed to find this argument fairly weak. 
>      However, the authors, Jeff and Bastien that it should be included.
>      I don't think you could say there's consensus here, and I'm 
>      certainly not going to try and call it. I'd lean towards its 
>      inclusion, though, unless it was obvious that other people felt
>      strongly that it shouldn't be included.

I've been looking over the code a bit as Telsa has been documented. Its
a neat tool but it is not IMHO production ready code yet. The way it
parses command line output isn't robust in some places (traceroute
breaks if there is multipathing, the netstat -r functionality it parses
on Linux is essentially compatibility glue in netstat that doesn't show
the routing tables in detail, and so on..).

I think it will be a neat tool, and a desktop tool - because often
administrators need diagnostic tools on the box that the end user can
operate under telephone direction. I don't think it is 2.8 material.

(if nettool hackers want a long discussion offlist abou things like
 linux routing tables I'm happy to help)

    "One is tempted to think of the planned RFID tagging of all US DoD
     supplies as a major step forward. This will finally enable the
     design of a new and far safer generation of mines that detonate
     only near people carrying DoD equipment."
                -- Markus Kuhn

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]