[Kamailio-Users] [sr-dev] kamailio 3.0 - the time before freezing

[Alex Balashov]

Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> On 24.08.2009 14:14 Uhr, Alex Balashov wrote:
>> The sip-router.org documentation is already excessively complicated 
>> and difficult to understand for anyone who does not routinely work 
>> with both the K and S code.  At this point, the documentation, while 
>> voluminous, is overwhelming and, in places, woefully incomplete,
 >
> can you point such places?

Yes, I will review it and make a list.

>> while in other places, I would say "exhaustively" (perhaps 
>> "exhaustingly") complete.
> 
>  From K point of view, same documentation is available, the core, pv and 
> transformations cookbooks are updated completely -- actually only core 
> cookbook needed a major update since we had a lot of new parameters for 
> dns, transport layers, etc...

That's good to know.  Half the problem is that people who don't know 
this scour all the documentation in an attempt to gain a holistic grasp 
of what the changes are, whether or not there are any.

> Your questions can be rephrased as "what is the difference between linux 
> and debian?". Debian is just a particular packaging of available linux 
> applications. In similar way, Kamailio, is SR core plus selection of SR 
> modules. Like in linux, where are application that overlap in 
> functionality, and one is preferred over the others (e.g., MTA), in SR 
> there are modules that overlap (e.g., auth) using a different 
> concept/database structure and one is preferred to the other.

I already understood this.  The question is - why would one be preferred 
to the other, from a practical perspective?  What are the substantive 
differences?

>> I also encounter the widespread perception from my customers that a 
>> lot of time has been spent on "fun"
 >
> I would have liked some fun, but there wasn't, not for me, very 
> interesting perception I would say, maybe you can point me such cases. 
> It was quite heavy work. The goal of trying to preserve max 
> compatibility while not messing up a lot of code in core was achieved - 
> the core impact was kept minimal, therefore inheriting stability from 
> ser 2.0. Several modules took the load of extra features.

It's not my perception.

>> and "interesting" integration work, not on developing features or 
>> fixing bugs.  I hope they're wrong.
> What are the bugs staying unfixed? What are missing features not 
> adopted? There was quite a lot of new development, including transport 
> layer such as sctp, asyncronous message processing (t_suspend/t_continue 
> which is functional), continuing with new modules (link provided in 
> previous email).

As I said, not my perception, so I personally cannot answer any of that. 
  I personally see a lot of new and interesting features and a fair bit 
of stability.

-- 
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems
Web     : http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel     : (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct  : (+1) (678) 954-0671