[LANdb] Re: snmp in 1.0

> > Yeah, that was the big alternative.  I dunno though: releasing 1.0
> > without snmp just seems weak, doesn't it?  One of the big reasons I "get
> > told" that "bah, if I have to enter all the data, how is it possibly
> > better than <other package>?"  I'd rather have the 1.0 that gets on
> > Slashdot because it's so bad-ass, then fix bugs on *that* for 1.0, and
> > do something like multi-language support, or extra-super-on-crack snmp
> > support for 1.2.  I guess it could even come down to a political thing,
> > which is generally bad, but "1.0" is important, and without snmp, 1.0 is
> > basically .81 with a user manager and a syslog.
> 
> hmm... okay, so how 'bout 0.90 splits into 0.91 -> stable w/out SNMP,
> and 0.99 -> stable plus SNMP devel -> 1.0 everything stable?

How bout 0.95 for stable?  There's a lot to do before SNMP's the only
thing left...

John




-- 
# John Madden  weez@avenir.dhs.org ICQ: 2EB9EA
# Sys-Admin / Webmaster, Avenir Web: http://avenir.dhs.org
# LANdb: Network Admin Database - http://avenir.dhs.org/landb/
# NCPweb: Web-based frontend to ncpfs - http://avenir.dhs.org/ncpweb/
# Linux, Apache, Perl and C. All the best things in life are Free!


-------------------------------------
LANdb - The Network Management Database
To unsubscribe, send email to landb-request@avenir.dhs.org
	and put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line
Administrative contact: weez@avenir.dhs.org
-------------------------------------