Stefan Sayer wrote:
>
> Raphael Coeffic wrote:
>> Gentlemen,
>>
>> i guess you all are getting pretty impatient about the long awaited 
>> 1.0 release. So now i'd like to ask you all: do we still have any 
>> show-stopper for, say, at least release candidate #1? Please speak 
>> now or never! ;-)
>
> I have ZRTP patch (all compile time optional) lying here I would like 
> to see in 1.0, and an application to record greeting message (its 
> actually silly to not have one, given how simple that is). I'll do 
> that today so lets do the branch tomorrow if that is ok with everyone.
>
ok.

> I have prepared complete prompt set with TTS from spokentext.net to 
> replace my self recorded (incomplete) ones. I've asked them whether 
> its ok to publish with SEMS but haven't got a response yet. nothing on 
> their site terms seems to be against using them so we might as well 
> simply use them.
>
ok.
> the webconference room timeout bug should be fixed I think.
>
i guess this is yours.

> I also see this log message appearing sometimes:
> Error: (trans_layer.cpp)(send_request)(522): Message was: <BYE 
> sip:sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]@192.168.1.102:5070 SIP/2.0^M
> which looks like something is messing up the contact parser.
>
Bugs will still be fixed in the branch. I just need the corresponding 
INVITE message, or better: the complete dialog dump. (maybe you can do 
that with iptego's great tool??).

>>
>>  From then, we will branch the HEAD into 1.0 branch. After that, only 
>> bug-fixes will be commited to that branch.
> head? thats trunk is it?
>
Yes, sure.

-Raphael.
_______________________________________________
Sems mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/sems

Reply via email to