[Voip-select] A question of distros for delivery of prepacked solutions

[David Sugar]

I am saying that there is little reason to package bayonne1 for non x86
architectures.  It also is not endian aware in it's treatment of linear
audio frames, so even if it compiled on some alternate platforms, like
ppc, for example, it would probably not behave correctly or usably.

Bayonne2 loosly relates to Bayonne1.  It uses many similar concepts, but
is different.  Incidently, libccaudio2 is largely a superset of
libccaudio (with endian awareness and support for pluggable codecs being
it's major changes), and libccscript3 is also a superset of
libccscript.   This is not different from the practice of things like
"libxml2" vs "libxml" or gnu libosip2 vs gnu libosip. 

Unfortunately, though, bayonne2 is a little more different than strickly
being a superset, although it is more closely related to the later test
branch of bayonne1 which were originally a superset of bayonne1 (post
1.2), but which were never "officially" made into distributions.  This
happened for several reasons. 

Originally, two of our contributors were exposed to legal risk by Digium
based on contracts they signed as asterisk contributors which claimed to
give Digium rights to "future" code they might write (a practice which
Digium much later stopped doing, thanks to the intervention and help of
Bradley Kuhn and the FSF), so given our policy of not accepting code
that has potential outside legal claiments, and that Digium at the time
made clear to one of them that they would claim their work, those parts
(including h323) were removed and new ones were latter written from
scratch by others.  The primary person who did this also changed the
architecture in some ways to support this better, but never released all
his changes, and certainly never timely, so it was not possible to
support his work or his changes either, as they were incomplete.  All
these things made it much simpler to just rewrite the service daemon
correctly, rather than try and support or fix incomplete things.

Kilian Krause wrote:

>Hi David,
>
>so, to get this straight, you're telling we should drop Bayonne1 and
>support Bayonne2 as from now on? I.e. no longer put work into fixing the
>1.2.15 bugs, but just leave it/drop it and go for the new 1.0.5? Can
>Bayonne2 be easily upgrading from Bayonne1 configs (which would need to
>be the case if we were using the same packaging name)? Is there a
>supposed to be used transition path? Or are those just two daemons
>running along the same ideas?
>
>  
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dyfet.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-voip-maintainers/attachments/20060103/17ecaf2c/dyfet.vcf