24 Jun
2009
24 Jun
'09
10:50 a.m.
On 06/24/2009 04:39 PM, Raúl Alexis Betancor Santana wrote:
On Wednesday 24 June 2009 15:22:50 Daniel-Constantin
Mierla wrote:
I think you do a confusion at this particular time. Kamailio project
goes on because there are overlapping modules from ser that won't be
integrated. I don't think that people would be happy to drop modules
from a side or another (e.g., like auth modules that are present in both
modules_k and modules_s).
We are talking about this particular project hosted by sip-router.org
which had no release so far, but needs an identity. Next version of
kamailio will still be named kamailio and include the modules inherited
from kamailio, probably including some modules from ser as well.
As it seems a pure ser release is not planned yet, we can stick with
this name for a while, because it is there and it is unique. In
kamailio, we do releases every 6 months, therefore September is just
about the time.
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com/
On 06/24/2009 04:01 PM, Raúl Alexis Betancor
Santana wrote:
Hi Daniel, I was just speaking about the binary/config name, not the project
name.
I supposed that if sip-router is been used as project name from the beginning,
chaning it now could be dangerous ... another project name change in less
than a year ? ... buff I don't see it
On Wednesday 24 June 2009 14:49:37 Juha Heinanen
wrote:
This is very bad from project identity point of view. I have been few
weeks ago at a conference in Germany and telling people that I present
sip router, everyone asked "which one?" It really looks ridiculous to
say something like " I manufacture a car named 'car' " (or "I
develop a
sip router name sip router").
Therefore, if matters, there should be some other identifier for the
project to make it easy to refer to others.
Cheers,
Daniel
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul writes:
> We still have the problem that we haven't decided yet on a
> short-name. (while the project is called sip-router, we haven't
> decided on the short binary name). Unfortunately this is proving to
> be very difficult since there are a lot of very different opinions
> (we tried once before and we gave up after 2 days because there was
> no agreement in sight).
my proposal is to call binary/config file sip-router/sip-router.cfg.
sr would be too short. tools, like ctl, could be prefixed with sr.
I like this proposal, look simple and clear.