On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 10:51 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
On Saturday 15 December 2007 10:02:23 Rob Hillis wrote:
One of the biggest barriers to upgrading are the number of little
gotchas in syntax changes that can make an upgrade from 1.2 to 1.4
quite painful. After the pain I went
All I can say is with 1.6, if a change is made that causes something
that worked in 1.4 not to work in 1.6, please think twice, three
times or four times before making the change, or making the change
in such a way that it won't break dialplan stuff from 1.4.
Our policy is to never
On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 06:11:47PM -, Chris Bagnall wrote:
I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading.
From our perspective I'd have to say package management.
We manage a *lot* of asterisk boxes at client locations at the end of DSL
connections. We have a schedule to
At 10:14 AM 12/15/2007, you wrote:
So Digium, (I address the company since Tilghman now works for you) do
you have any plans to query the user community and determine what a
typical end user of the product needs? With the knowledge and skill that
exists in your organization it would seem trivial
Hello All ,
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, Johansson Olle E wrote:
Friends in the Asterisk community,
I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2
and 1.4 there's been a lot of
important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions.
I realize that 1.4
When Digium starts using 1.4 in ABE then I would consider using it
in a
production environment. All I ever hear is soon, and I have heard
that for months if not the whole year. Until Digium itself is
comfortable selling and supporting this version, then neither am I.
Steve,
That's very
If anything broke from the transition from 1.2 to 1.4, it is because you
were
using something that was deprecated in 1.2. What we had attempted to do
in deprecation modes was to print the warning ONCE for each deprecated
operation, per Asterisk startup. I think that this was much too
Tilghman Lesher wrote:
If anything broke from the transition from 1.2 to 1.4, it is because you were
using something that was deprecated in 1.2.
After thinking about it for a while this is not true.
Well, it's true for the dialplan.
Changing CALLERIDNUM to CALLERID(num) is easy.
But i guess
Johansson Olle E wrote:
Friends in the Asterisk community,
I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2
and 1.4 there's been a lot of
important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions.
I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release,
- Original Message -
From: Ira [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial
Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
At 10
On Saturday 15 December 2007 13:50:35 Ira wrote:
A perfect example is the new dial plan function array(),
it has nothing to do with arrays, doesn't accomplish anything useful
that couldn't have been done by allowing commas in set(), or calling
it setmany(), and means if real arrays ever get
Olle E Johansson wrote:
All I can say is with 1.6, if a change is made that causes something
that worked in 1.4 not to work in 1.6, please think twice, three
times or four times before making the change, or making the change
in such a way that it won't break dialplan stuff from 1.4.
You've hit the nail on the head with the crux of the pain I went
through. Finding stuff that was broke that I didn't realise was broke
until someone bothered to tell me about it. I'm sure everyone is
familiar with just how often users report problems caused by themselves,
but don't report stuff
My biggest gripe is that everything loaded and seemed to work. A
day later we found this did not work and discovered a syntax
change. A day later something else did not work, an other syntax
change. Why isn't there some pre-processor to check the syntax of
the config files? Would
101 - 114 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
