Hi Paul, Le 1 mars 2018 10:47, "Paul Offord" <paul.off...@advance7.com> a écrit :
Hi Pascal, Thanks for your note regarding my change 26203 - https://code.wireshark.org/ review/#/c/26203/ . You suggested that I submit it as a built-in dissector, not a plugin. I’m not keen for two reasons: - If it is rejected (and I have a feeling it will be), I’ll then have to rewrite it to offer as an optional plugin - I think adding it as a built-in dissector means changes to core Wireshark code Why do you think it should be a built-in dissector? Because : - we do not want to end with tons of plugins to support, that are heavier than built-in ones (startup time, more files to install,...) - our policy is to add new dissectors as built-in, not plugins (we are even converting some old plugins to built-in) Plugins are usually used for people not willing to submit code to Wireshark upstream. This is not your case, so you should really convert it to built-in (which is a 5 mn work or even less). Best regards, Pascal.
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
