Julien BLACHE [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sheldon Hearn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You'll find a good example of this in the apache2 packages, which
have /etc/apache2/mods-available and /etc/apache2/mods-enabled.
Diverging from upstream in this area is not an option for obvious
reasons.
I am
tag 459244 + wontfix
thanks
Matthew King wrote:
To the best of my knowledge the (mods|site)-(available|enabled) system
that Apache uses is something in Debian that has diverged from
upstream. At least insofar as their configuration doesn't use it by
default. The ability via the include
Faidon Liambotis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
tag 459244 + wontfix
thanks
Matthew King wrote:
To the best of my knowledge the (mods|site)-(available|enabled) system
that Apache uses is something in Debian that has diverged from
upstream. At least insofar as their configuration doesn't use it
На Sat, 05 Jan 2008 03:03:05 +0200
Faidon Liambotis [EMAIL PROTECTED] записано:
You can always disable autoload and load only the modules that you
want to. You can leave them unconfigured or even remove the
configuration files. With the current infrastructure you can even
provide a
На Sat, 5 Jan 2008 03:10:21 +0200
Tzafrir Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] записано:
What functionality is extra? For me chan_zap is a rather core
functionality and app_ices isn't.
I can't easily know what functionality will be used.
In other hand, you can easily know what will be not, right ?
If
Roman Galeyev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It will simplify the asterisk maintance and help tracking problems,
I totally fail to see how it's going to help with maintenance. Quite
the contrary, it's going to complexify the build scripts for no good
reason, add a bunch of packages to the control
На Sat, 05 Jan 2008 11:10:05 +0100
Julien BLACHE [EMAIL PROTECTED] записано:
That doesn't buy anything, you've just had a false good idea.
May be idea is not so false but implementation ;) Think of a modules
configuration script, like apache. It will allow to achieve the same
thing.
--
With
На Sat, 05 Jan 2008 16:13:21 +0200
Faidon Liambotis [EMAIL PROTECTED] записано:
Splittting to 50 (or 40, or 30, or...) packages for maintainance
reasons: over my dead body :-)
Just trying to be clear here, there's no point of discussing this
further.
Ok, I've agreed with everybody that
jamhed wrote:
На Sat, 05 Jan 2008 11:10:05 +0100
Julien BLACHE [EMAIL PROTECTED] записано:
That doesn't buy anything, you've just had a false good idea.
May be idea is not so false but implementation ;) Think of a modules
configuration script, like apache. It will allow to achieve the same
On Saturday 05 January 2008 09:38:12 jamhed wrote:
Could we agree that keeping every module and it config in one place,
and enablig it to autoload by default is just not the right thing ?
You'll find a good example of this in the apache2 packages, which
have /etc/apache2/mods-available and
Sheldon Hearn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You'll find a good example of this in the apache2 packages, which
have /etc/apache2/mods-available and /etc/apache2/mods-enabled.
Diverging from upstream in this area is not an option for obvious
reasons.
So I suggest you take that up with upstream.
Package: asterisk
Version: 1:1.4.8~dfsg-1
Severity: wishlist
While maintaining a lot of asterisk installations I've come to
conclusion to split up a huge single package into smaller ones,
like one package for one application, one package for codecs,
one package for basic core functions (really
На Sat, 5 Jan 2008 01:34:59 +0200
Tzafrir Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] записано:
ls /usr/lib/asterisk/modules/ |wc
164 1642483
So I suggest you be more specific about what you want to move to
subpackages. Why would you want app_voicemail.so in a separate
package? What harm is it in
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 04:04:34AM +0500, Roman Galeyev wrote:
Package: asterisk
Version: 1:1.4.8~dfsg-1
Severity: wishlist
While maintaining a lot of asterisk installations I've come to
conclusion to split up a huge single package into smaller ones,
like one package for one application,
На Sat, 5 Jan 2008 05:32:25 +0500
jamhed [EMAIL PROTECTED] записано:
На Sat, 5 Jan 2008 01:34:59 +0200
Tzafrir Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] записано:
Even more, will it be better to pre-package modules not included in
main asterisk tree as a separate sub-package, making it available
without need of
jamhed wrote:
So I suggest you be more specific about what you want to move to
subpackages. Why would you want app_voicemail.so in a separate
package? What harm is it in this module lying around?
One valid reason would be dependency on external libraries: odbc,
pgsql, netsnmp, radius,
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 05:32:25AM +0500, jamhed wrote:
What I've got so far:
asterisk-adsi
asterisk-ael
asterisk-app-alarmreceiver
asterisk-app-amd
asterisk-app-core
- here is included everything related to basic functionality, like:
usr/lib/asterisk/modules/app_authenticate.so
17 matches
Mail list logo
