Yeah, I realize that. A direct port of the old logic was of course the goal so far, with the drawbacks of that approach accepted & understood. That's what's in place now; that's great and exactly as planned. We can get 2.6 out this way, and it'll be fine.
My point is that now also seems like a good time to take stock of what we got that way. That direct porting is finally getting us some sense of where things aren't an ideal match between API and use cases yet. And if there's something easy we can do about that before people start relying on the new API, it seems that would be beneficial to do. But we can see. Robin On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 13:39 -0500, Jonathan Siwek wrote: > How much is due to new API usage and how much is due to things mainly > being a direct port of old communication patterns (which I guess are > written by various people over extended lengths of time and so there's > inconsistencies to be expected) ? Or due to being a mishmash of both > old and new? -- Robin Sommer * Corelight, Inc. * ro...@corelight.com * www.corelight.com _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list bro-dev@bro.org http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
