On Monday, 3 April 2017 21:48:12 UTC+3, Warren Torrance wrote: > > Just wanted to note that it may be worth evaluating Logstash as a > potential collector in the LogVM. > > While the code base is large, the project itself is modular, so by > limiting how many plugins are utilized/custom written, the attack surface > may be acceptable. > > Note that it addresses a number of the goals of the log collector > specified here. > > I have a good deal of experience in both, contributing and administering > the stack, so I'm happy to provide some guidance in that area if it is > useful/desired. >
Well, that is an interesting point. Jean-Philippe also warned me that we should be careful to avoid reinventing the wheel in the LogVM side. So, Logstash can be a possible decision too. In any case, it's really kind of you to offer assistance in this matter. I will definitely learn more about Logstash and come back to ask you questions. ;) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qubes-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to qubes-devel@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-devel/2a4a6cfe-4d28-4de9-b226-ae9bc8224ac5%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
