Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 16:44:51 +0200
From: "Matt Riddell (IT)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Response to KP Flemming...
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
<[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 09:12 -0500, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
----- trixter aka Bret McDanel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Since the code does appear to be very much identical to code that was
denied to exist in the first place, but links were posted that makes
it
appear identical in many ways. Kinda makes one wonder what the real
story is.
Nobody denied that this code existed.
I never said that anyone denied the code existed, stop rearranging what
was said to suit your needs. Please read what is actually said instead
of living in fantasy land. It would make everything so much easier.
I do however see now that you qualified it with 'binary module' as
opposed to just module. I will admit my error in missing the word
'binary' as opposed to intentionally misreprenting what was said.
Kinda makes one wonder what the real story is when there is so much
hostility over such a little issue.
If it isnt your code why are you so bent over it? Digium goes out and
gets links removed on other sites without knowing whose code it is (as
they claim) to protect this phantom entity. Maybe the entity that wrote
that code wanted it released.
Even though many of the symbols do infact match the digium code and some
of the code is code that digium freely gives out via CVS (as was
confirmed by digium representatives) you gotta wonder why they went out
to non digium controlled sites to get links removed.
Makes me wonder what the real story is anyway.
1. I doubt it was Digium who got the links removed. I for one posted to
the abuse emails on those sites and asked for them to be removed.
2. The code claims to come from Digium. This is damaging and could
potentially create legal claims against Digium, whether or not it really
did come from Digium. Should they have to pay to "win" this? Would you
rather they spent the VC on legal fees or bettering Asterisk?
3. Why do you feel the need to constantly attack Digium? You constantly
accuse everyone else of hostility and yet come off sounding like a 30
year old with remaining teen angst.
4. Where can we download your improvements to Asterisk? You have often
talked of your h4x0ring d3cafbad skillz0rz and yet I fail to see your
additions.
5. Maybe decaf would be a better idea.
- --
Cheers,
Matt Riddell
I think the issue is that people dont want to see Digium have full control
over it should they make changes to it and then possibly Digium coming after
them. I can understand thier concern. Kevin seems to be posting diffrently
than he normally does. On the other hand is it such a big deal ? How is
Digium's current set up going to change your day to day lofe ?
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
