On Thursday 09 October 2008 09:57:30 pm Steve Totaro wrote: > Now I have not touched any of that code, but to me, it would have been much > simpler to change names, then change functionality later. Make DAHDI a > drop in replacement for Zaptel, in fact, if memory serves me correctly that > is what someone at Digium explained, it was merely a find and replace > operation.
i agree with the idea that a drop in should have been created, and functionality built from there. i'm not sure i feel as strongly as the OP suggested in the subject subject line he created. for those users of 1.6, you're now in a corner: go any higher than 1.6 beta 9 and you need dahdi. no overlap with zaptel was created here. perhaps zaptel could have been kept in until 1.6.1, giving the 0.0.1 overldap :) i've been trying to follow the devel of dahdi closely, even to the point of building kernel modules for fedora that *should* work with jeffrey ollie's tools packages, just approved by the package reviewers. still, there are some concerning things that have been lingering, namely for me: http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=13443 well, anyway, just my two cents. -- Anthony - http://messinet.com - http://messinet.com/~amessina/gallery 8F89 5E72 8DF0 BCF0 10BE 9967 92DC 35DC B001 4A4E
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
