© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
(In reply to Ethan Galstad from comment #51)
> I fail to see why a change in the package name would be called for or
> thought to be a wise idea. As the original author of many of the plugins in
> the package, I have been involved with an seen a number of turnovers in the
> Nagios plugin development team over the past 15 years.
Just to comment on this, your contribution can be reviewed at http://
> Just because some of the previous plugin developers decided to leave the
> project to create their own separate project, doesn't necessitate a change
All at once without stating that clearly? Anyways .. your representatives stated [1] you "had to take back control". This fit's with your view of leaving "the project to create their own separate project"?
> to (or removal of) the original project, which has existed much longer than
> individual developers' involvement in it.
>
> IMO, changing the name of the package would be a huge disservice to the
> Fedora community, as well as the RHEL customer base.
From packaging point of view, this can be managed with correlations in the packaging management, for example with 'provide', 'conflict' and 'break', depending on the packaging system.
> For those who are interested, we posted a news article about the plugin team
> changes at
> http://
> changes
Maybe you are feeling sad about how the story went, it is a
absolutly "unethical behavior of" Nagios Enterprises, LCC how you spead lies about Holger!
Maybe god with you, when it maybe necessary!
[1] https:/