hello everyone
sorry but I’ve been asking myself this question for days that I can’t find an explanation, and I wanted to share it with you
here on the forum lately I’ve seen some small changes that I think are interesting for IPFire, the filter for the connections.cgi page comes to mind or the RPZ engine where many users have tried it and given their feedback on how it works
I was wondering why they aren’t integrated into the system if not as native components like pakfire
I want to point out that mine is a simple question NOT intended to be controversial but arises only out of curiosity if there is a technical reason or something else
1 Like
Good and healthy question.
I believe (in my opinion) that it’s because for something to be integrated that isn’t maintained by the IPFire team, the developer must commit to its maintenance. Without that commitment, proper functioning over time isn’t guaranteed.
This happened with an add-on that was created to send reports, which was very good, but the person who developed it stopped maintaining it. Now that add-on works as it does.
Sorry for my poor English.
That’s what I believe, without getting into controversy.
Saludos.
This modification also remained in limbo:
Saludos.
Roberto, thanks for your opinion, I understand what you say, but let me make a consideration that I made on my own before making my post, just to understand better.
Let’s take for example the file connections.cgi where a user posted the modified file and the same one tried by some users where the same one works well, obviously I am aware that it is not always like this for all the components provided by the community
Replacing it with the standard one is the step is minimal and on the part of the team I would say very close to zero, then the investment for maintenance is the same as the current one.
so replacing it does not involve investment or hours of work, and a better tool is provided than the current one
Any patches for submission of changes should be sent to the developers mailing list as described in the IPFire documentation.
That has not yet occurred for one of the patches that you mention.
Once a patch or patch set has been submitted then it needs to be reviewed and that involves an interactive discussion with regard to any questions that are raised.
With the second patch set you mention that interaction had been started but it seems to have stalled for the last 7 or so weeks.
2 Likes
thanks Adolf for the precise and detailed answer, but allow me to express my thoughts and such must be.
I understand the motivation and the path described in the documentation to make a component official, but I think that some changes posted on the forum by the community if one of the team acts as a spokesperson would streamline the path and the work for the whole team
the only one who gains from this is only the IPFire project but maybe I’m wrong