Your ideas sounds just about right. Let me know what we'd need to do on the mbuni side of things to (finally) get Kannel + Mbuni builds behaving right.
On Nov 30, 2005, at 15:32, Stipe Tolj wrote:

Paul Bagyenda wrote:

Sounds good.
FYI: The only points in the mbuni patch that are not of general interest have to do with the config params. All else should really be in Kannel.

yep, agree... I'm currently reviewing the patch and will commit changes to Kannel's CVS.

The issue about config directives that are used explicetly for Mbuni should go also into the direction of an add-on API config mechanism, in order to let add-on extentions configure and build without the explicite need on patching Kannel's source tree.

Something like:

  $ cd gateway
  $ ./configure .... --with-add-on=../mbuni

then Mbuni's configure would be triggered after Kannel's configure runs and Kannel would proive a mechanism to "incorporate" the "new" config directives into it's gwlib/cfg.c module.

At least an approach, if you come up with a better one, please shout, we're open for ideas in this section.

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

Reply via email to