On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 10:25:18PM -0500, Tim Nelson wrote: > Hello all- ** > > [...] > > What is the status of Callweaver? I see there has been progressive > development, or at least recent 'changesets' [1] to the codebase(stopped > Feb 14th, Valentines day related? :-) ),
Holiday and offline development related. > but a release has not been made > since nearly a year ago. Checking the milestones [2], the project seems > to be severely behind 'schedule'. Although a lot of those "next version" tickets are pretty vague "ideas" that people have had but no one really cares about. > While not a problem in and of itself, > it would be nice to know what the roadblocks are to the project's > development. Is it manpower, funding, equipment, etc? All three :-). For me callweaver is just how I keep my coding skills sharpened (and asterisk-derived code needs a razor sharp... machete... at times :-) ). It's spare time, non-comp. "work". I'd be happy to do more focused work if anybody cared about anything in particular. > I primarily use Callweaver in a T.38 fax role as I believe many others > do as well. The general 'rule' that appears to be floating around the > VoIP/open source telephony arena is "If you need a softswitch PBX, use > Asterisk unless you need good T.38 support integrated, then use > Callweaver.". Well, with Asterisk 1.6 and heavy development of T.38 > support/compatibility, it appears Callweaver may be falling into less > and less relevance. While I understand there are more advantages[3] to > Callweaver than simply T.38 (cross platform support, timing dependency > changes, performance, virtualization operation), many others do not > understand this. I'd really hate to see a project like Callweaver die or > slip into 'unconsciousness'. Asterisk has added lots of "stuff" in the last few years. Some of it good, some of it maybe not so. I'd go back to * but I really object to signing my work over to them gratis, I dislike much of the code anyway and I'm not much of a fan of their mailing lists. I'd go to FreeSwitch but for inertia and a dislike of (arguably) inappropriate XML. And Callweaver does what _I_ need (see above). > On a final note (to the devs), please accept my gratitude and thanks for > Callweaver. I use it extensively in my systems for both business, > personal, and development roles and your hard work is appreciated. I am > in no way trying to 'call you out' to get information on Callweaver. > This is not a "where are the lazy guys who aren't getting anything done > with Callweaver" type inquiry. I'm honestly looking for some insight > into the current status and depending on project needs, I may be able to > provide resources to help Callweaver along. > > --Tim > > ** - Crossposted to -users and -dev > [1] http://www.callweaver.org/changesets > [2] http://www.callweaver.org/milestones > [3] http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/OpenPBX.org%20FAQ Mike -- Mike Jagdis Web: http://www.eris-associates.co.uk Eris Associates Limited Tel: +44 7780 608 368 Reading, England Fax: +44 118 926 6974 _______________________________________________ Callweaver-users mailing list Callweaver-users@callweaver.org http://lists.callweaver.org/mailman/listinfo/callweaver-users
