Re: What about a new `mib' command?

Buz Owen (ado@BBN.COM)
Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:30:18 -0500

>I would like to push people a bit to make the changes as soon as
>possible. My own experience tells me that many people start to change
>existing code only if it breaks. Transition periods simply delay these
>updates in most cases. I tend to make the old syntax available via a
>compile time option. This makes people aware that they should update
>their script (because they have to edit the Makefile when compiling
>scotty) and chances are much higher that they get tired of doing
>this. Will this approach work for you?

Sure. I can always convert scripts I still have under my control
anyway, especially if the conversion is mechanical. (Will I
be able to execute the following twice, with the same value of
x,

[ mib node $x ] syntax

without error?)

But scripts can sometimes find their way into the hands of people
who didn't write them, who don't know (maybe don't still employ)
the original author, and maybe don't have full control of their
environment. They are happily using some script, and one day it
breaks when someone deletes the oldest copy of scotty. This then
reflects on the system that they think broke their scripts by not
maintaining backward compatibility.

/b

--
!! This message is brought to you via the `tkined & scotty' mailing list.
!! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To subscribe or
!! unsubscribe, send a mail message to <tkined-request@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>.
!! See http://wwwsnmp.cs.utwente.nl/~schoenw/scotty/ for more information.