Asterisk 1.4 + bristuff

[Kilian Krause]

Faidon,

On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 02:38:26PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> I was pretty disappointed when I saw that you decided to drop the 
> BRIstuff patch for Asterisk 1.4. I can, however, understand the reasons 
> behind it, namely the maintainance burden and the difficulty of catching 
> up with upstream.
> 
> As I told Mark in Edinburgh, I'd like to share this burden.
> As a first step, I've splitted bristuff 0.4.0-test3 to 37(!) independent 
> patches and converted the package to quilt instead of dpatch.
> The patch is attached.

Great! That's wonderful! Can we use the split but keep dpatch to stay
with just one patch-system for pkg-voip?


> [note that I haven't done the same for zaptel/libpri, as the patches 
> can't be splitted more]

Ok.


> The split is by functionality and not by file; there are some 
> interdependencies between patches for some huge things, but I've tried 
> to minimize them.

Good.


> This will make forward-porting or disabling a section of BRIstuff much 
> easier.

It should.


> As for the second problem, the difficulty to catch up to newer versions 
> released by Digium, I think that with a splitted patch we may manage; 
> after all the Linux kernel is way bigger and the kernel team is 
> maintaining external patchsets like VServer and Xen for many releases.

Yes, even though over there it's a mess too if upstream doesn't help.


> If the consensus is negative on this, we could upload a different source 
> package than can track bristuff (after all, it's essentialy a fork) 
> while the normal package goes forward to a newer version. I find this 
> suboptimal, but you may thing otherwise :-)

Fork is not really the way to go as we duplicate more than 80% of the
code. Thus all security fixes would be doubled (and eventually
forgotten).


> Either way, I'd hate to see asterisk-classic/asterisk-bristuff. I've 
> been running bristuff with BRI cards for over 4 years now and with PRI 
> cards for over a year and never had a problem.
> If something breaks, we can handle it, I think. We're pretty early in 
> the release cycle still.

Cool. Well, the point in asterisk-classic/asterisk-bristuff was rather
that some of the support from Digium was bound to an untainted asterisk.
For that historically people running asterisk-bristuff had been rejected
from help. This may have changed - in which case we could just ship the
bristuff-enabled - or we might need to redo the
asterisk-classic/asterisk-bristuff.


> Consider this an offer to join pkg-voip maintainers ;-)

You're welcome as help is always short on packages like asterisk. 


> I've contributing from time to time various stuff to the team, but I 
> think it's time to get more involved.

Sure.

-- 
Best regards,
Kilian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-voip-maintainers/attachments/20070720/3fbad70c/attachment.pgp