I'm also interested in the status of the latest NTP Internet Drafts. Are they solid enough for implementation?
I'm inclined to say yes to the MacOS patches, but I want to hear the discussion, and read the patches myself. ..m On Sat, Nov 4, 2017, 2:54 PM Eric S. Raymond via devel <devel@ntpsec.org> wrote: > Apologies to all for having been rather invisible recently. What > happened was I got an emergency call for help from a project we rely on - > GNUPLOT. (Perhaps not everyone knows this is the graphics engine we use > in ntpviz, which is one of our sexier new features.) > > It seems that SourceForge, where GNUPLOT is hosted, is soon to shut > down CVS service (I don't remember the drop-dead date but I think it's > in November). The GNUPLOT guys decided they needed a git conversion > *immediately*, and they did, and I was the logical person to turn to. > > Which would have been no big deal except that CVS conversions are > horrible time- and attention-sinks. This one was only moderately > nasty as such things go, but that was enough to eat my bandwidth > for two weeks. Anyway, happy ending - GNUPLOT will not die and > ntpviz still has a back end. > > We have some loose ends from 1.0 to clean up. I took care of a few > of them today; unpeer needed to be upgunned so it can take a type/unit > pair rather than a magic IP address, and there was a pending dead-code > removal. I've also removed some obsolete to-dos. > > Here's what I see as the top of the near-term agenda: > > * Fred and Gary need to have, and resolve, their argument about what to > do to the build recipe around Python library installation. For > concreteness, this should probably start with a proposed patch from > Fred. > > * There are couple of Mac-support merge requests pending from > Fred. Whether to take them is not a technical question but a > policy one, how hardnosed we're going to be abour our C99/POSIX > baseline. In view of our adoption strategy, are older versions > if Mac OS X important enough to make an exception? Discuss; > once the pros and cons have been laid out we'll want a ukase > from Mark. > > * I would like us to plan on a short-cycle 1.1, to land early January, > with SNMP support as the big new feature. Ian: is this a realistic > timeframe? Is there any support you're not getting that you'll need > to get this done. > > Senior devs: please chime in with any goals you think we ought to > pursue for 1.1. > > I've got a really big one that's not going to get done in one release > cycle, but which I consider worth some thought beginning now. > -- > <a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a> > > The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can > bribe the people with their own money. > -- Alexis de Tocqueville > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@ntpsec.org > http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > -- Mark Atwood http://about.me/markatwood +1-206-604-2198 Mobile & Signal
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
