[Serusers] OpenSER release

[Giudice, Salvatore]

Is anyone using this bug tracking system? Is this system sponsored by
iptel.org? 

-----Original Message-----
From: m36828253-1 at imap.1and1.com [mailto:m36828253-1 at pop.1and1.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 3:16 PM
To: greger at teigre.com; Giudice, Salvatore; serdev at lists.iptel.org;
serusers at lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] OpenSER release

Why the bug tracking page in a different website.
Why not under iptel.org ?

Mohammad


Original Message:
-----------------
From: Greger V. Teigre greger at teigre.com
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 21:03:21 +0200
To: Salvatore.Giudice at FMR.COM, serdev at lists.iptel.org, serusers at lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] OpenSER release


I completely agree with you. I have been told that there was an attempt
at 
introducing a bug-tracking system earlier, but that it has been
difficult. 
Anyhow, in setting up policies and procedures around the experimental 
directory, we have decided that usage of http://bugs.sip-router.org will
be 
mandatory.  Hopefully recent, better integration between the bug
tracking 
system and the CVS will make it more convenient to use also for other
CVS 
modules (however, I don't have a say there).
g-)

Giudice, Salvatore wrote:
> 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 at voice-system.ro]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 4:28 AM
> To: Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul
> Cc: SER developer mailing list; serusers; users at openser.org;
> devel at openser.org
> Subject: Re: [Serusers] OpenSER release
>
> On 06/14/05 23:21, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
>
>> On Jun 14, 2005 at 22:48, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
> <daniel at voice-system.ro> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>
>>> It is your opinion, but I repeat myself, that the SER code
>>> maintained by 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 soon
>
>>> 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)?
>>
>>
> It is fork for the code that we changed (acc module, usrloc module
> ...),
>
> 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.
>
>> 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
> be
>
> 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 at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers 

_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers at lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .