On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 10:15:50AM +0100, Dave Shield wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 11:04 +0200, Thomas Anders wrote:
> > what do people think about adding "deprecated" warnings (documentation
> > and runtime) to directives like "exec" (what else?) in 5.3? Or is 5.3
> > considered too early for this?
>
> Depends on the directive.
>
> As far as "exec" is concerned, there's already a warning message for
> the relocatable form of this directive (which is the important one).
> We probably need to bump up the strength of this message for 5.3.
>
>
> The only other candidates for "deprecated" directives that spring
> to mind would be "r[ow]{community,user}" - assuming we want to push
> people towards the new "auth{community,user}" directives instead.
>
I think we could use a deprecation warning on the three argument forms of
trapsink, trap2sink and informsink in order to nudge people in the direction
of using address specifiers in the host argument to specify the port.
/MF
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.
Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course
Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005
Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
