Re: plans

[Martin Pala]

I agree - it is more realistic plan :) As you said the big plan isn't
probably possible to do because of resorces.

I will prepare language proposal for discussion, but i will ommit complex
description of internal relationship (just what will be needed).

Martin


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jan-Henrik Haukeland" <address@hidden>
To: "The monit developer list" <address@hidden>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: plans


> Martin Pala <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
> >>
> >>Anyway, I think now is a good time to step back, reflect and think
> >>about design and do two things:
> >>
> >>1. fix the control file language.
> >>2. Fix the code base (design).
>
> I have been thinking again :) When it comes to fixing the control file
> language I'm for it, but when it comes to refactor the code base I was
> wrong. Let me explain;
>
> 1) Refactoring and redesigning a code base like monit with 20K lines
>    of C code is to much work for us. And from what I have seen in other
>    open source projects (mostly in apache/jakarta) refactoring is most
>    likely to succeed if it's done by *one* developer. None of us have
>    time to do this, at least now. And to start something we cannot
>    finnish is not good because it is a waist of time and work.
>
> 2) The old saying "if it work don't fix it" is still true.
>
> What I propose instead is to do this INCREMENTALLY. That is, we do
> *NOT* start with a grand new architecture plan and reimplement
> everything. Instead we only refactor what we have to reimplement for
> Martin's new language proposal to work. But when we reimplement new
> stuff lets keep in mind the object oriented technique I proposed
> earlier and when possible extract stuff from the monitor.h interface
> and put it in a new header. This way we will refactor the code base
> gradually but with real progress and with always a working monit
> system in CVS.
>
> In short, lets just start with reimplementing the language and do
> refactoring only when it is necessary to implement new stuff.
>
> This also means that we keep the current architecture and only change
> it when we really have to do so. The current architecture is still
> sort of an event driven architecture in that validate.c generate
> "events" which it dispatch to the various alert_xxx functions :)
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -- 
> Jan-Henrik Haukeland
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> monit-dev mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monit-dev
>


---
Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry.
Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz).
Verze: 6.0.491 / Virová báze: 290 - datum vydání: 18.6.2003