Hi Stipe
Now that would be great - I'm guessing your implying Apache style
modules here where they can be registered in the config files
[http://modules.apache.org/]?
This way, as you say, Mbuni could be built as a module for inclusion in
the Kannel core - which we mean this, and other complimentary products,
Gnokii for example would be a great module to complement at2 in Kannel,
could work without having lots of patching involved.
Alex
Stipe Tolj wrote:
Alex Judd wrote:
That would make some sense!
Yes, sorry I was thinking the Kannel part was a fixed entity when of
course it does make sense that the patches between 1.0 and CVS are
different
now, this bings us again to an issue that we are discussing in
devel@kannel.org for some time: module API.
Having a clean module API would mean that add-on modules can
"register" at Kannel's core (also using config constructs) and manual
patching of the source (ie. for Mbuni and our new sqlbox add-on
module) would become absolute.
Just giving this in here, to let people think about it.
Stipe
mailto:stolj_{at}_wapme-group.de
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wapme Systems AG
Vogelsanger Weg 80
40470 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
phone: +49.211.74845.0
fax: +49.211.74845.299
mailto:info_{at}_wapme-systems.de
http://www.wapme-systems.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@mbuni.org
http://mbuni.org/mailman/listinfo/devel_mbuni.org
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@mbuni.org
http://mbuni.org/mailman/listinfo/devel_mbuni.org
