[Asterisk-Dev] asterisk 'stable'?

[Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk]

> Well, still, maybe you should go read up on software design. Maybe we
> should put notes here that this isn't for Roy until we are finished  
> with
> it.
>
> Software goes into a feature freeze so bugs can be found and addressed
> without adding new code to be debugged. The idea is that you as a
> business should not be surprised by any changes in that tree. It  
> should
> break due to upgrade.

well. take a look at FreeBSD. In that project they have feature  
freezes and then stabilisation. When bugs are reported, they get fixed.

In Asterisk, bugs are not fixed. People are rather told to "upgrade  
to latest CVS to see if the problem persists"

> Consider the stable trees to be like a windows version, do you get
> pissed that they ship patches from time to time to fix problems? Do  
> you
> see them make major changes during a patch cycle(excuse the XP sp2
> changes). You only expect feature changes at major release changes. We
> are getting ready for that, right? Then we will see. Of course you may
> still exercise less tested sections of code and still see problems.  
> I'm
> sure you will make this rant again and again until you either are
> finally suited on a specific revision or you lose interest and go
> elsewhere.

As I clearly stated, I neither run Windows, nor  expect M$ to give me  
patches for their bugs, but IMHO it should be in the Open Source Mind  
to do so. Those bugs I've reported are general in the use of which I do.

roy