On Thursday, May 29, 2003, at 08:31 PM, jhml@gmx.net wrote:
>> Jonny, it your personal email address is bouncing.
>> That you know (maybe even the mailinglist email bounces for you).
> Sorry for that. It seems like 1409.org is permanently gone. I've now
> switched
> to an account I have to pay for just to be on the safe side in the
> future. I
> hope this will also prevent most of the spam I received as they use
> SpamAssassin...
I had hazewinkel.net also and maybe within the spam I did
not receive or see the invoice of the domain.
>>> - SNMP_VALUEMETHOD_LIBRARY:
>>> - SNMP_VALUEMETHOD_PLAIN:
>>> - SNMP_VALUEMETHOD_OBJECT:
>> Do these names to be so long?? I was thinking we cane drop the
>> 'VALUEMETHOD' or 'METHOD' part. Would that be OK and which do
>> you prefer??
> To be honest I was never happy with these names. "valuemethod" sounds
> clumsy
> to me, but English is not my mother tongue. I'm also not happy with
> "snmp_setvaluemethod" as a function name. Maybe we could call the
> function
> "snmp_setvalueretrieval" and the constants SNMP_VALUE_*? I'm really not
> insisting on names, I only want the functionality, so every comment is
> welcome!
The names are not that important, but long ones require a lot
of typing from programmers and shorter ones avoid such a change.
I would 'VALUEMETHOD' drop completely.
>>> the value type returned by the SNMP
>>> agent (the ASN_* constants from the net-snmp library are also
>>> defined as PHP constants)
>> I believe the ASN_ prefix should be SNMP_ and changed as such.
>> That they are internally ASN_ does not matter.
> Ok, I'll change these constants to SNMP_*.
OK.
>> ANother thing I would like to ask is whether the group wants to
>> support
>> also all kinds of types of SNMP that are not standardized and somehow
>> added to NET-SNMP as an expiriment.
>> I believe it is better to drop those, what do you think??
> I don't need them. If nobody gives me some reason to keep them, I'll
> drop
> them.
I would say only standard bits. The expirimental parts
as as said, expirimental and many agents do not have them
either.
> I'll wait for another week for some comments as I have a strange
> feeling that
> absolutely nobody else has yet commented on the patch. If no further
> comments
> are posted, I'll create a new patch. Would be a dream if gets into
> 4.3.3...
Not sure, but why not.
Harrie
