Re: [Users] "detached" timer

the spread and evolution of openser project proves contrary -- knowing what was then and where openser got so far, I can say that the fork was a good thing. You should accept the open source environment where the code can be forked at any moment, even if you like it or not. If you personally don't like it, doesn't mean it is something bad.

I'm afraid you try to spread unrealistic stories -- since you started the activity on openser mailing lists there was no constructive conversation from your side, only accuses and claims to the project and folks here. Really, you are not force to use openser or participate to mailing lists if you dislike it. OpenSER had all the time the roadmap public (btw, osas pointed we should upgrade it :-) ), it happened to be changed when external contributions popped up, or was strong demand of some feature. When you do such statements, please list some of those great things, and we will let you know when it started and how evolved (of course, you can dig on mailing lists and forums if you want quick answer). I could say that is the opposite direction, I may have quite strong arguments, but I don't, because will end in political discussions, without a good progressive result, so, there was no inspiration from openser to ser.

Regarding porting tm/timers or what so ever, we appreciate and welcome any contribution to OpenSER, it will be reviewed and accepted if brings something new or good. Not to invest unnecessary efforts in you side, ser's tm is very likely to be rejected as it is now, because its known big vulnerability to DoS. OpenSER tm module has very good performances and lot of features which are not in ser.