Op 3 sep 2010, om 15:55 heeft Adam Armstrong het volgende geschreven:
On 03/09/2010 14:52, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:We generally don't mind people rewriting things, so long as the code retains a level of simplicity that means most people can work on it (i.e. no OOP or complex structures), as most of us aren't programmers primarily :)
Op 3 sep 2010, om 15:33 heeft Adam Armstrong het volgende geschreven:
Aye - agreed. I took it from the other scripts in that section - as I was unsure how much freedom I had to 'fix' that.It needs a bit of cleaning up (the table and stuff is kinda ugly), but it's useful :)
Dw.
Ok.
There is a lot of very old and dirty code which should be rewritten,Yes - and a lot of security/injection problems.
so it's not always a good idea to look at existing stuff for examples. Personally, I can't write user-interaction stuff to save my life, so it's usually terrible.
Ok. Meanwhile - would you mind me doing a bit of a clean (like the patch for freebsd/darwin/solaris) of a few days ago ? Or is that not something you are willing to merge in ? In which case it is easier for me to ignore patch cleanup.
My private agenda is a bit if 'ignore' flags (disks, interfaces) where needed, disk thresholds, SNMPv3, netgear switches (see patch), bit more power discovery on APC and perhaps an 'aggregate/stack bandwidht' display for switches as an option in the all-devices-graph-popup - as for a lot of swtiches uptime/cpu displays make little sense.