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
