Talk:Nagios

message: How comes NRPE and NSCA are not even mentioned, whereas almost never heard of addons are ?
--Olivier Debre (talk) 12:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NSCA/NRPE 

message: I reverted this change which I suspect was vandalism. If I'm wrong, please revert my change, and provide a ref. Nurg (talk) 02:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I just started, can you tell me what the pronunciation was before you changed it, Nurg? Sonic5001 (talk) 03:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation of ''Nagios''

message: Is the licence GPL v2 or v3? The lede and the overview sections are contradicting each other.... AugustinMa (talk) 11:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Where is that linked from?  If you actually download Nagios core ( ==>  ==>  ==> ), the license provided is the GPL V2, June 1991. TJRC (talk) 19:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

text: source is at . TJRC (talk) 20:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  License 

message: It's becoming clear that one or more people related to the author of Nagios are constantly removing external links pointing to Icinga and other notable related projects.  (see above).  So a question:  Should we request this page be semi-protected to start with? Funderburg (talk) 10:40, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nagiosinc which has resulted in several accounts being blocked as sockpuppets. - MrOllie (talk) 00:37, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request Protection? 

message: You know what, I'll leave this for someone else to decide. After a more careful review I would also like to point out that the original edit is not even following appropriate wikipedia guidelines. The original states that it was a move that was not given warning, yet this article by Nagios, https://www.nagios.org/news/2014/01/nagios-plugin-team-changes/, says otherwise. What are the actual facts? This isn't able to be considered a netural standpoint. Either the paragraph should be removed (which I did) or someone should edit the section to make it neutral and include an actual section on the Nagios plugins project if other Nagios plugins project related material is going to be showing up in this article. Jhom526 (talk) 04:28, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Well that's the vendor's point of view. And there are always (at least) two sides to every story. OnionRing (talk) 07:21, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  It seems "After failing to acknowledge our reasonable requests, we updated the website to reflect the changes we had requested" doesn't say anything about giving warning. I can see how someone could construe that as an implicit warning. Also, just so no one goes digging since this is a contentious issue. Yes, I live in the TwinCities. I just moved here. I don't know anyone that works at Nagios Inc. micro.fragdev.com/daw (talk) 22:14, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

text:  Last time I checked, just because you write an article against something doesn't make it true. Unless I am wrong, this is the US and you cannot say that something happened without proof. The other side of it is just as liable to lying as the original. It's the equivalent of someone writing their own blog post and then linking it here as a proof that ducks are actually descendants of penguins. Your logic is completely baseless. Again, if Wikipedia is going with facts, this is NOT a fact and should not be on here. If someone wants to find trivial matters such as the argument between the two entities about the project they can find it somewhere else. What is Wikipedia gaining by having this added to something that it is hardly related to. Again I point out it's directed at "Nagios Enterprises" and not "Nagios". Jhom526 (talk) 14:05, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added another reference to clarify that the vendor's opinion was not shared by all of the plugin developers involved. OnionRing (talk) 14:25, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Better than before, I still think the nagios plugins project should be mentioned... maybe someone will take the time to add info in about it. Jhom526 (talk) 18:58, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nagios-plugins controversy 

message: Nagios XI is the commercially-supported version of Nagios, created by the Nagios developers, with several open-source additions bundled with what's now called "Nagios Core" by its vendor, along with an enhanced user interface. In a nutshell, it's the "pro version" of Nagios, sold alongside the free community version, and not really separately notable enough for its own article. I suggest we merge the Nagios XI article here, as has already been attempted by another editor. It's also nearly orphaned, being only linked from here and from Comparison of network monitoring systems, and it's not unknown for the free and "pro" versions from one software article to be listed on two lines in comparison articles. OnionRing (talk) 09:08, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This logic is again flawed. How can people on Wikipedia think that just because they have a general understanding of something means that they understand what something is. If you have not used these products then you are obviously unaware of the differences and as such think that they are the same. It is not "the pro version" it's an enterprise suite of applications that form an actual piece of software. The comparison to Nagios Core is that Nagios Core is like the patty on a hamburger and Nagios XI is the rest. If this were true, then all the other monitoring projects and commercial products on Wikipedia should be removed because they "are all the same" and that is just silly. If someone doesn't know what "Nagios XI" is, then the page explains what it is, and Nagios Core is just a part of it. The reason it is listed separately than Nagios Core on the monitoring solutions page is because Nagios Core is a separate, free, open-source solution that MANY other monitoring solutions use as it's back-end including multiple solutions that are listed on that monitoring solutions page. Will you remove every solution that uses it? If the product was not named "Nagios XI" you may think of it as a more separate item. Unfortunately that's it's name, and also why there is confusion about what Nagios/Nagios Core/Nagios XI is. Jhom526 (talk) 14:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I've used both products for years, so I'm quite aware that Core and XI are two versions of one product: basic and enhanced. It's possible to build XI's functional equivalent with little effort and zero capital cost by combining "Nagios Core" with other open source software, so the real value of XI is the commercial support. And merging two articles on two items of similar software will not result in the deletion of all other monitoring software articles: this is an example of the slippery slope fallacy. OnionRing (talk) 14:23, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is definitely not possible to build the equivalent of XI with just open source components. It requires full time developers to build and produce it. A good example of exactly what you just said is ELK - elasticsearch, logstash, and kibana are all separate projects that form to create a suite of products. It requires no extra external pieces that hold it all together. XI has portions that were written specifically for it (every single .php file) and is it's own product. I am not against allowing others to give their opinion. This is just mine. Jhom526 (talk) 14:38, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Well then, let's leave aside the question of how much effort it takes to build a functional equivalent of XI. But you haven't addressed the central question yet: how is XI notable enough for a separate article? OnionRing (talk) 14:43, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest I don't mind if it's all incorporated into one article or not as long as it's listed with it's own information. However, there is plenty of places such as the list of monitoring software that require it's own article in order to link to it. That being the case, I created one. If determining sources for notability is that there isn't enough secondary sources that talk about it, I would suggest making a quick search and going a few pages in on google. There is a plethora of information, reviews, how-tos, projects incorporating it, integrations, etc that involve Nagios XI specifically that do not come from Nagios Enterprises. Jhom526 (talk) 19:15, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

text: An update on this after some more investigation. If both versions are listed on the Nagios page and separately linked via the comparison chart in Comparison of network monitoring systems then I think these should definitely be merged. I am not sure how to do this, so someone else would have to do that. Jhom526 (talk) 20:18, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: That can be done by simply linking the Nagios Core entry to Nagios#Overview or similar, and the Nagios XI entry to Nagios#Nagios XI. OnionRing (talk) 13:55, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is easy enough, since it seems like the 3 of us already pretty much agree, will give it a week (WP:Merging as guide) and see if anyone else has an opinion on this. I can come back and merge it then unless someone beats me to it. Jhom526 (talk) 19:09, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Nagios XI]] 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
* 
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:22, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion