Clarity required on PR's and bugfixes

I’ve begun to put in a PR for a small readability enhancement for the Linux agent. I see the PR form now has the following note:

Thank you for your interest in contributing to Checkmk! Unfortunately, due to our current work load,
we can at the moment only consider pure bugfixes, as stated in our
Readme. Thus, any new pull request which
is not a pure bugfix will be closed. Instead of creating a PR, please consider sharing new check
plugins, agent plugins, special agents or notification plugins via the
Checkmk Exchange.

What constitutes a “pure” bugfix? To my mind it’s something that fixes a coding error which is producing undesirable results. But you might think differently… it’s not clear where the line is set here.

Either way, that’s, um, counter-collaborative. I want to put in an improvement for the agent. Not a plugin.
Not a special agent. The agent.

So… where does that leave me? Should I make a soft-fork (spork?) of the agent and share that via the exchange?

I would read it in that way that no new PR for new functions or extended functions are accepted at the moment.
Your agent rework is already running a little bit longer, I would contact someone from the Munich team directly and ask what this means for your bigger rework of the Linux agent.

Hi @rawiriblundell,

What you think is right, ‘pure bugfix’ here is something that fixes an error.

In that case, an improvement of the agent can be considered a new feature, which will take time to evaluate and test— something we unfortunately don’t have the capacity for right now. :frowning_face:

We always want to collaborate with the community but we came to a difficult position where we have to allocate our limited resources for the time being.

I will try to find more technical information on what would be the option for your specific case/PR.

Sorry for the inconvenience, would really appreciate your understanding for this matter. Thank you for all the time and effort you share with the community!


It is very disappointing when good ideas from people who probably work with CMK more than most people at trieb29 are rejected in this way.

Ironically, this idea would probably have reduced the effort for future enhancements and maintenance of the agents and thus also helped to reduce the future workload.

Let’s face it, no one in the community is going to want to invest time and resources in the future to make CMK even better if they get a reaction like this from trieb29.

This is how it started with Nagios. On the other hand, it was also the beginning of CMK’s successful rise :wink: