On 5/19/2010 7:26 PM, Douglas Hubler wrote: > 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. >
Sounds like documentation of development environment is not adequate.. Not going to gripe about EDE as I know it has saved our folks lots of time. Will see what can be added on the DE not EDE :) Al _______________________________________________ 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/
