> From: lafo...@gnumonks.org
> 1) Is this the way how the wireshark development model / flow is
> supposed to work ?
Yes. The Wireshark model is that people submit patchs and then the Wireshark
core developers become the ongoing maintainers. This seems to have been
necessary for a long time because people have time to submit patches to make
improvments, but not always continue maintaining their code over the years.
> 2) If yes, do you really think that the gain in flexibilty caused by
> this anarchy overweighs the benefit of having dissector-authors give
> timely feedback to proposed changes, or prevent breakage?
The break of functionality you described is a separate problem. Dissector
functionality should not be broken regardless of who is making the changes -
original author or not. Of course, mistakes do happen. The best way to
prevent this is probably to have sample captures on the wiki for each protocol
or attached to bug updates to test the changes/existing functionality.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
