On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:01 AM, Alfred Campbell <[email protected]> wrote: > I think what you maybe getting at is we should probably better document > the EDE steps so people don't need to reverse engineer scripts?
Not really, My point is that there are 2 areas that better suited for a lot of the effort that was put into EDE such as autoconf and config check scripts. The remaining can go into documentation on the wiki not about EDE but about what commands someone would need to run in their terminal. When the commands are presented like that, folks can adapt according to their environment. The sheer presence of something like EDE misleads developers into thinking if I put some code in here that works on my system, my obligation to release management is done. >From my recent experiences having found out only in at runtime that there were parts of the system that were not setup correctly and the system had plenty of opportunity to check for me seems unfortunate. I'm currently training a group of potential developers on suse about how to setup their environment and we're hitting an embarrassing amount of issues that were solved for CentOS in EDE. I can contribute code to autoconf and config checks myself, but I was more attempting to get any ongoing effort pointed in a better served direction IMHO. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
