On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Olle E. Johansson <[email protected]> wrote: > > It would mean continuing to maintain Asterisk's pjproject fork until those > changes were (hopefully) accepted upstream, released, and then waiting for > the rpm/deb packages to catch up. Not to mention that someone would > actually have to _do_ all of this work. Could all volunteers please raise > their hands? ;-) > > > If this is how we are going to manage our product then I'm getting really > worried. Are we controlling our own software? >
Of course we are controlling our own software! The problem of "I need something in this library, and adding it brings me out of step with the upstream until they accept it" is certainly not new to Asterisk's usage of PJSIP. It's the same problem every open source project has faced when they depend on another open source project. And there is, of course, an easy solution: write a patch to the open source project you depend on, submit it upstream, and in the meantime deal with the differences. Is that a bit harder than embedding a library or writing the entire library yourself? Of course. Does it mean that some changes that you might make if you "owned the code" you instead choose not to make because you have to submit it upstream? Sure. That's part of the cost of depending on someone else's code. But the benefits of using a library far outweigh the disadvantages: the fact that in a year or so of time we were able to produce a functioning SIP channel driver with 95% of the features in chan_sip and additional features besides should be proof enough of the benefit. -- Matthew Jordan Digium, Inc. | Engineering Manager 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA Check us out at: http://digium.com & http://asterisk.org -- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
