On 2. jun. 2005, at 10.05, Christian Hopp wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
Well, I agree with you, hauk. We should not work around our own
infrastructure in monit. We could provide the patch as a contrib
patch and use the implementation as an inspiration for our own code.
As far as we got now with the event engine, we should think about
organizing it as we did it for the protocols. Thus, we make it
easy to seamlessly integrate custom event code.
Nicely put Christian, your two lines summarize my own rather long
ranting :-)
=> -1 for including the patch as it is right now
=> put the patch in contrib
Marco's custom log patch is put up in the contrib directory http://
www.tildeslash.com/monit/dist/contrib/. Thanks Marco!
When we get time (will we ever?) we should rewrite output for the
event handling machinery to match the same "design pattern" we have
used for protocol verification (as you suggest). My email in this
same thread with the title [dependency injection] also describe some
thoughts around a design solution along those lines. I'll see if I
can write up a more formal specification later.
--
Jan-Henrik Haukeland
Mobil +47 97141255
_______________________________________________
monit-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monit-dev
