[Pascal Quantin <pascal.quantin@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Paul,

Le 1 mars 2018 10:47, "Paul Offord" <Paul.Offord@xxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

Hi Pascal,

 

Thanks for your note regarding my change 26203 - https://code.wireshark.org/review/#/c/26203/ .  You suggested that I submit it as a built-in dissector, not a plugin.  I’m not keen for two reasons:

 

• If it is rejected (and I have a feeling it will be), I’ll then have to rewrite it to offer as an optional plugin
• I think adding it as a built-in dissector means changes to core Wireshark code

 

Why do you think it should be a built-in dissector?

Because :

- we do not want to end with tons of plugins to support, that are heavier than built-in ones (startup time, more files to install,...)

- our policy is to add new dissectors as built-in, not plugins (we are even converting some old plugins to built-in)

Plugins are usually used for people not willing to submit code to Wireshark upstream. This is not your case, so you should really convert it to built-in (which is a 5 mn work or even less).

Best regards,

Pascal.