J�rgen Thomsen wrote:
And, please, don't drag the discussion here down to whether that small patch is good or not. More important issues are at stake. They go way beyond the rejection of a single patch ie. should Kannel be a 'lowest common denominator' software or should it be a framework to handle several protocols as 'abstracted' as possible but with provisions for handling all aspects of a specific protocol.
In my view the latter is a much more useful and challenging point of view.
great. At last we agree. Same for me.
[seems at some point now, that a lot of words have been spoken, and basic opinions haven't been even too far away from eachother]
The "problem" is on how to achieve this idialistic thing.
Stipe
mailto:stolj_{at}_wapme.de ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wapme Systems AG
Vogelsanger Weg 80 40470 D�sseldorf, NRW, Germany
phone: +49.211.74845.0 fax: +49.211.74845.299
mailto:info_{at}_wapme-systems.de http://www.wapme-systems.de/ -------------------------------------------------------------------
