[Serusers] Re: Fw: [Users] TM : retransmission timers

[Mike Williams]

Bogdan,

This seems similar to the same message I wrote about this earlier. New users 
don't seem to be able to see all of the great work that has been done since 
OpenSER forked, or any of the original reasons why OpenSER was forked, 
especially now that SER seems to have learned from OpenSER how to better 
treat the users community. 

In response to this, I think someone needs to start a wiki page about the 
differences, and I think another page needs to be dedicated to the progress 
OpenSER has made since the fork. This would highlight true advantages and 
disadvantages of using OpenSER over SER, and would also show the real amount 
of work that the OpenSER team has done.

I'll try to get something started over this weekend, if I have time.

Mike Williams


On Thursday 23 November 2006 07:36, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> Andrei,
>
> just *one* reply from my side, as I really do not like to get into this
> discussion.
>
> First of all I say all your opinions and statements about openser are
> based on a glimpse over the project and they reflect neither that you
> really understand it, nor you followed all the changes and improvements
> we had.
>
> So, please excuse me, but I cannot find as valid statements your sayings
> like : ser is faster, ser has more in core, ser has these and these.....
> Of course, in your quest, you forgot to take into account all the
> clean-up and speed-ups in acc, usrloc, register, tm , etc module -core
> also-, the new feature and modules, that openser had PV from the
> beginning or the fact that most ser's adds-on actually followed the
> original roadmap of openser (posted on the web site). But I do not
> accuse you, because it is not your job to follow openser's evolution, so
> things may escape you.
>
> So, let us talk about things we really know. And do not think that the
> difference between ser and openser it's only about code....a project is
> not only the code..it is policy and attitude and respect regarding the
> community.
>
> Definitely we will try to consider the things you found unjust (like
> mentioning the project along the contributor's name). We do not want to
> bother anybody - in fact you probably notice that from openser side
> there was no negative posts (about ser) on the mailing list or web -
> just the truth with your own words. I really do not understand your
> attitude :(.
>
> I just wanted to express my opinion about this discussion which
> hopefully goes to an end.
>
> All the best regards,
> Bogdan
>
> Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 2006 at 11:43, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at>
> > wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >>>I've tried looking at openser core & tm commits and I haven't seen any
> >>>significant changes (and this is not a flamewar attempt).
> >>
> >>Aren't the pseudo variables vs. select framework significant changes?
> >>Also TLS in core vs. TLS as module?
> >
> >Ok. I've meant openser core vs ser 0.9.4, or if you want what openser
> >core has extra compared to ser 0.10.99 (speaking of bigger features,
> >probably only the statistics part and the new MI, which seems to
> >correspond to ser's RPC, so I wouldn't call it an extra, but
> >re-inventing the wheel).
> >If we are talking the other way arround, ser core has evolved much more
> > (avps in script, select, timers, dns, blacklist a.s.o).
> >That's one of the reason I'm suggesting that it would be a good ideea
> > to switch to it (and at least tm), besides performance tunning and
> > extra-testing.
> >
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >
> >Andrei
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Users mailing list
> >Users at openser.org
> >http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users