cvs commit: ports/net Makefile ports/net/asterisk14 Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/net/asterisk14/files asterisk.sh.in codecnego-patch-Makefile dtmf_debug.diff ilbc_enable.diff nocodecnego-patch-Makefile patch-Makefile.rules ...

[Doug Barton]

On 11/08/2011 17:13, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> On 11/7/2011 4:29 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>> Given that we already have 1.6 and 1.8 in ports, what's the value of
>> having this much older version?
>>
>> I didn't hear one single request to spare it when I deprecated it many
>> months ago, and it's been completely gone for over 3 weeks now. Have
>> users been asking for it to be returned?
> 
> There is a reason why Digium still makes security releases of that
> software. And we still have 1.0 and 1.2 in the tree, so why not 1.4?
> IMHO, 1.4 should stay at least until 1.0 and 1.2 get booted.

I'm only seeing 1.0, but in any case I don't see this as a reason to go
in the wrong direction. :)  However ...

> I know at least few other companies that use 1.4 heavily and if you take
> just Sippy Software we have around 100 production installations that use
> 1.4 around the globe, so you have a very motivated maintainer.

... this sounds perfectly reasonable. Thanks for the explanation.


Doug

-- 

		"We could put the whole Internet into a book."
		"Too practical."

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/