16 Jun
2005
16 Jun
'05
3:48 p.m.
Policy is only as good as its communication to the people it applies to.
Besides the initial announcement, how many times was this site
publicized in the mailing list or enforced as standard practice to have
patches added to the project?
-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Janak [mailto:jan@iptel.org]
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 9:08 PM
To: info(a)beeplove.com
Cc: Giudice, Salvatore; daniel(a)voice-system.ro; andrei(a)iptel.org;
serdev(a)iptel.org; serusers(a)iptel.org; devel(a)openser.org;
users(a)openser.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] OpenSER release
There is such a bug tracking system running at
http://bugs.sip-router.org
It is powered by Jira and is quite easy to use. I announced it to serdev
mailing list some time ago but there seemed to be no interest, from
core developers only myself and Andrei created accounts. I was using it
for a while and I find it easy to use and convenient.
Jan.
On 15-06-2005 14:24, info(a)beeplove.com wrote:
It is fork for the code that we changed (acc module, usrloc module ...),
I agree with you.
We should have proper bug tracking system, including feature request.
MOhammad
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Giudice, Salvatore Salvatore.Giudice(a)FMR.COM
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 14:12:15 -0400
To: daniel(a)voice-system.ro, andrei(a)iptel.org, serdev(a)iptel.org,
serusers(a)iptel.org, devel(a)openser.org, users(a)openser.org
Subject: RE: [Serusers] OpenSER release
I am not an advocate for either ser or openser, but I would like to
comment.
Is openser going to be equipped with a forum/ticket system where
people
can document bugs, feature requests, etc
(non-configuration issues)?
This is just my observation and you may not agree, but I believe this
project could be much better maintained if it used a more structured
ticketing style system to manage development issues instead of the
current mailing lists. In my experience, mailing lists like this
foster
a terrible user experience where many development
issues can go on
without response.
Ideally, if there was a mailing list to address user issues and
ticketing system like the one Digium uses to manage Asterisk, I think
everyone would benefit by being better informed and ser would
ultimately
be a better product for it. How many people out there
feel that their
issues have fallen through the cracks in the past couple years?
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:daniel@voice-system.ro]
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 4:28 AM
To: Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul
Cc: SER developer mailing list; serusers; users(a)openser.org;
devel(a)openser.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] OpenSER release
On 06/14/05 23:21, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
maintained
On Jun 14, 2005 at 22:48, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<daniel(a)voice-system.ro> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>
>>It is your opinion, but I repeat myself, that the SER code by
soon
>us will go further -- I don't think that
someone can claim that we
>didn't do the job for our code (the only discrepancy is some
last-minute
>>adds in xlog (to print avps) - will be committed on unstable very with the
new color patch). The cvs was created just to ease the
maintainance. The patches would be a nightmare.
Maybe I've misunderstood you: is this only a parallel "stabilized"
version + some features or is it a full fork (do you intend to fork
unstable also)?
in the future may be other that they do not find the path in SER. We
will maintain and upgrade our part of code from SER continuously.
be
I have no problem with another stable version,
what worries me is
fragmenting the development for unstable (which is the place where
major
changes are made).
I see no fragmenting there -- the situation is the same for SER as it
was before. For example, there is no fragment for acc module, it will
maintained by who did it till now, adding what he considers necessary
there. But we came to meet a lot of requests of why the acc patch is
not
included in the CVS (it was fully backward compatible and had new
features requested by many SER users) and we want to promote _more
open_
approach to contributions to all parts of code. The acc patch was sent
on November 1, 2004. No real response (neither
negative, nor positive)
from maintainer to the submission since then ... are
you aware of a
good
reason?!?! ... should we wait just about (or more) half an year for
each
contribution?!? I will not do that anymore!!!
Daniel
Andrei
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)iptel.org
http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)iptel.org
http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)iptel.org
http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers