[Nagiosplug-devel] [Nagiosplug-help] check_ntp

[Ton Voon]

On 15 Nov 2007, at 18:05, Thomas Guyot-Sionnest wrote:

>> And:
>>    - add a deprecation note in check_ntp --help with preference to
>> check_ntp_time and check_ntp_peers
>
> I'm fine with the names Andreas suggested except that I'd remove  
> the "s"
> from check_ntp_peers as it only check one peer (my initial  
> suggestion if
> you didn't read the whole thread was "check_ntpd").

I'd vote for check_ntp_peer, but it's your change, so you have  
casting vote!

>>    - add a similar note in NEWS
>
> I'd like to start a more in-depth document called RELEASE_NOTES or
> something like that that would explain all the changes that might  
> affect
> users. This way we should keep all entries in NEWS one-liners and have
> more space to communicate the possible issues and gotchas.
>
> Just like NEWS it would cover all previous releases, so someone
> upgrading from an old release could just go tough the release notes  
> for
> each releases in-between.

Not sure what this buys us, as it sounds like duplication. What about  
the one-liner being like heading and then the more descriptive text  
underneath? Then for official releases, I'll just take the headings  
and put that in the news article.

The heading should say if there is an incompatibility so then you  
would read the NEWS file for more details.

For example:

Incompatibility: check_ntp replaced with check_ntp_peer and  
check_ntp_time
   check_ntp had two distinct functions which are now separated out  
for clarity...{extra technical stuff}...check_ntp will be deprecated  
in the 1.5 release.

I'm thinking that the sourceforge download should have the full NOTES  
for that release, but any publicity will just have the headline.


>> Thomas, can you merge your branch into trunk with this?
>
> I still have some work on check_ntp_peers, some tests on both new
> plugins (have you looked at the new check_ntp.t? It covers all three
> plugins with many more checks, but if you prefer separate checks I can
> split them up easily), and some code review...

Sounds good. I haven't looked, I'm afraid. I'll let others that know  
what is going on do that :)

> I kind of paused development of this as I wanted some time to think
> about it, and ideally get other reviews like yours... Since you seem
> enthusiastic about it and want to go forward, I'll hurry up and get  
> this
> done asap.

Great.

>> We can cut a 1.4.11 release as this should be out as soon as  
>> possible.
>
> If it's about the two security fixes we could just make a butfix  
> release
> with them and have more time to work on 1.4.11. There's also a bug in
> processing N::P .ini arguments. I posted a patch some time ago but  
> since
> my code is much simpler I felt like I could have overlooked  
> something so
> I didn't commit it.
>
> I'll reply to myself about that as it seems that it was missed. It  
> would
> be nice to have a newer N::P out at the same time and included in the
> newer release.

If it will only take another week, I think we can hold off 1.4.11 and  
the security fixes for the same release.

>> I'd probably be a bit more aggressive and say in 1.5, check_ntp just
>> returns CRITICAL with "obsolete - use check_ntp_time and
>> check_ntp_peers instead" since everything is in place for a
>> conversion already, but if you all think a more conservative approach
>> is better, we can do it this way.
>
> IMHO, UNKNOWN would be more appropriate. Afaik just removing the  
> plugin
> would return UNKNOWN as well (not arguing that we should do it  
> though).

Agreed.

> Considering the lifecycle of 1.4.x, 1.5 is pretty much a major  
> release.
> I'm good for making it a dummy check in 1.5.
>
> While we're at it, it will soon be a good time to branch 1.4.x and  
> start
> working on 1.5. You should do that as soon as you publish your roadmap
> (below).

I keep delaying it, but one thing I realised when I was writing the  
slides for the Netways conference was that I'm a bottleneck for a lot  
of activity. I'm going to fix that. First start here: http:// 
nagiosplugins.org/roadmap


>> Let's make a decision on this - I need to get a roadmap published and
>> this can be added.
>
> Yep, I was about to suggest that too. IMO that will help us drive our
> development efforts to get further and better. You should talk with
> Holger as he has some nice plans for the C plugins.

I want to write up something on nagiosplugins.org about the current  
status of the config file options (which is in the perl libraries,  
but not the C ones), and I want to re-group over the performance data  
for 2.0. Give me the weekend and I'll start a thread on monday.

Ton

http://www.altinity.com
T: +44 (0)870 787 9243
F: +44 (0)845 280 1725
Skype: tonvoon