[asterisk-dev] Re: 'IAX2 call variable passing between servers '

[Tilghman Lesher]

On Friday 04 August 2006 10:52, Douglas Garstang wrote:
> On, Friday, August 04, 2006 at 9:31 AM, Tony Mountifield wrote:
> > Douglas Garstang <dgarstang at oneeighty.com> wrote:
> > > > From: Matt Riddell (NZ) [mailto:matt.riddell at sineapps.com]
> > > >
> > > > If you spent half as much time reading up on coding as
> > > > you do typing
> > > > your complaints, you could have easily solved the
> > > > situation by now.
> > > >
> > > > You have 2 choices:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Do the work yourself
> > > > 2) Pay for someone to do it for you
> > >
> > > No Matt. It's comical. This is exactly the type of
> > > situation that IAX2
> > > was designed for, and it doesn't do it very well. The very
> > > fact that I
> > > have to make modifications to the code to get IAX2 to work,
> > > but not SIP
> > > (yet), indicates IAX2 is falling far short of it's expectations.
> >
> > What you're missing is that this is how open-source software works.
> > It solves the problems that the people who wrote the code wanted
> > solved. If
> > you need to solve other problems with it, you are at liberty
> > to add your
> > solution and so enhance the codebase.
> >
> > > I don't see how this is complaining. I am trying to solve a
> > > problem, and
> > > given the lack of documentation out there, this is one of
> > > the few places
> > > to turn. I can't understand why it is that whenever I ask
> > > questions that
> > > are due to limitations in Asterisk, it's called complaining.
> >
> > Well you haven't quite got the hang of this diplomacy thing.
> > When you come
> > across the need for a feature that hasn't YET been
> > implemented, you come
> > onto the lists dissing Asterisk for all you are worth,
> > instead of calmly
> > stating what you are trying to do and asking for ideas on how
> > you could
> > enhance Asterisk to do it.
> >
> > Asterisk now does vastly more than it did when I first
> > started using it
> > over two years ago. In another year's time, it will do even more.
> > Hopefully, some of those upcoming features will be a result of you
> > enhancing Asterisk to fulfil your particular needs, and
> > submitting those
> > enhancements. It's a two-way street.
>
> Why is it assumed that anyone who uses Asterisk is a) a C programmer
> and b) wants to be a C programmer?

Why is it assumed that we should pay you the slightest bit of deference
if you're not willing to make the effort?

As Matt said earlier in this thread, you have two choices:  either code
it yourself or pay someone to do it.

-- 
Tilghman