[Bro-Dev] libbroker status/plans
jsiwek at illinois.edu
Fri Oct 24 08:02:57 PDT 2014
> On Oct 23, 2014, at 5:20 PM, Robin Sommer <robin at icir.org> wrote:
> What I meant was ensuring the two stay in sync. Say if we added a new
> capability to C++, can we trigger somehow a test failure if we forget
> to add it to C?
Don’t have any ideas for how to do that at the moment, but, yes, it would be nice to have that type of coverage test.
> I was imagining for 2.4 we'd leave the BroControl parts in place as
> they are now, i.e., using the old comm framework. Were you planing to
> replace that already?
Yeah, I was thinking the user would be given a binary choice: either everything uses new comm or everything uses old comm. But I guess it also works to say old comm is still available for everything it used to be, but additionally/concurrently there’s the option of trying the new comm for tasks related to A, B, and C. I’m not sure what approach I like best, but may make sense to go in to the integration process with the intent of just making incremental additions and then see how far we get.
More information about the bro-dev