Guys, guys!
Isn't it easier to split into 2 different ports for 4.x and 5.x/6.x and
stop this debate? F.e. mysql does this for their 4.0, 4.1 and 5.0
branches for freebsd ports without much noise. With a separate volunteer
4.x port maintainer it's the most painless path for all of us IMHO.
Just my 2 cents in,
Vahan
Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Richard Neese wrote:
well I nice to hear but what has kept you from moving to 5.x wich was a
stable branch and works fine. it should not be those of use who move
ahead in
life have to pay because others choose to lag.
its time to catchup ot branch off. and let the drivers move forward
this stale
mate has to end.
we need updated drivers and if 4.x vs 5.x 6.x is the main issue then
sorry
support for 4.x has to go stale.
this is time to move onword and upword.
Got any more dusty sayings? When you put a machine into production
it's not the same as your hobby machine where you can dick around with
the operating system and upgrade and downgrade anytime you want.
Not that it's any of your business, but I am running 5.x and 6-B5 on
other machines. There are reasons beyond production for the others
to have to stay at 4.x - but with your current attitude about it I have
no doubt that you'd fail to understand.
Vince.
begin:vcard
fn:Vahan Yerkanian
n:Yerkanian;Vahan
org:ARMINCO Global Telecommunications;Head, Research & Development dept.
adr:;;28, Isahakian ave., PO BOX 10;Yerevan;;375009;Armenia
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.arminco.com/
version:2.1
end:vcard
_______________________________________________
Asterisk-BSD mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-bsd
