You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
i just discovered NETworkManager thanks to an article on ip-insider and i am amazed.
I was just thinking, if it would be generally helpful to implement a way for users to configure "application profiles" for their custom connection methods (e.g. "the classics" - rustdesk, teamviewer, anydesk, ilo, redfish, curl, git, vlc ...).
Instead of reacting to each feature request for a peticular integration ("Can you please integrate XYZ in NETworkManager"), users could just create those "application profiles" themselves and share them with the community. And yes, i do see the irony here proposing a feature request in order to end all feature requests. Won't happen again ;-)
This could potentially blow up the size of the profile/backup json, if every user-created "application profile" would be added to the file.
I am aware of the implication and risks of anybody adding their made-up datastructures as a chaotic extention (I am a dba by training). This won't be maintainable.
So separating "standard application profiles" (ssh, pwsh, snmp, ping etc) and "custom application profiles" from the actual connection parameter (hostname, ip, port, username, pw, keys, certs etc.) and thereby abstracting could reduce the code complexity and enhance the versatility of connection types at the same time.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi,
i just discovered NETworkManager thanks to an article on ip-insider and i am amazed.
I was just thinking, if it would be generally helpful to implement a way for users to configure "application profiles" for their custom connection methods (e.g. "the classics" - rustdesk, teamviewer, anydesk, ilo, redfish, curl, git, vlc ...).
Instead of reacting to each feature request for a peticular integration ("Can you please integrate XYZ in NETworkManager"), users could just create those "application profiles" themselves and share them with the community. And yes, i do see the irony here proposing a feature request in order to end all feature requests. Won't happen again ;-)
This could potentially blow up the size of the profile/backup json, if every user-created "application profile" would be added to the file.
I am aware of the implication and risks of anybody adding their made-up datastructures as a chaotic extention (I am a dba by training). This won't be maintainable.
So separating "standard application profiles" (ssh, pwsh, snmp, ping etc) and "custom application profiles" from the actual connection parameter (hostname, ip, port, username, pw, keys, certs etc.) and thereby abstracting could reduce the code complexity and enhance the versatility of connection types at the same time.
I am just spitballing ideas.
Best iggny
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions