On 9/17/07, Dan Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Lacy's response in the thread 'Why does > everyone seem to dislike *now?', has a small > bit that caught my eye. > > Chan_Skinny made a lot of progress between 1.2 and > 1.4, and even more in the later 1.4.X releases. > > I am curious as to which features/functions that > chan_skinny might be lacking compared to chan_sccp. > We (the community) now have a small, but active, > group of volunteers working on the chan_skinny code.
In the next week or so, I'll try to take a look at chan_skinny again before making any comparisons. It would be great if chan_skinny worked as well as chan_sccp. I'm not interested in re-igniting the flame-wars of > the past about these channel drivers, but I would like > to know what else needs to be addressed in chan_skinny > before it users of chan_sccp would consider using it. > > Thanks, > Dan > > _______________________________________________ > > Sign up now for AstriCon 2007! September 25-28th. > http://www.astricon.net/ > > --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > -- Lacy Moore Somewhere I wish I wasn't
_______________________________________________ Sign up now for AstriCon 2007! September 25-28th. http://www.astricon.net/ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
