[asterisk-dev] Violent Objections? CDR dst/dcontext probs in 1.4+ when a macro is involved.

[Tilghman Lesher]

On Friday 29 June 2007, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> >>>>> "TL" == Tilghman Lesher <tilghman at mail.jeffandtilghman.com> writes:
>
> TL> Essentially, this argument is "the standards we have come up with
> TL> don't match everybody's needs, so therefore we should have no
> TL> standards." I respectfully disagree, and I think the answer is, if
> TL> the standard fields that we provide don't meet your needs, use
> TL> other fields. Don't diminish the needs of other users to have
> TL> reliable standard fields just because certain users don't use
> TL> them.
>
> If you force people to use non-standard fields, billing packages have
> a lot of work ahead of them. Everyone will come up with their own
> field names and maybe even formats.

On the contrary, if you force people to use fields that they create, people
will adapt their Asterisk installations to match particular billing solutions.
I've already done this exact thing with one particular customer.  It made a
whole lot more sense to adapt the CDR to that customer's billing system than
to try to translate the standard fields into the fields his billing system
already used.  In other words, Asterisk adapted to the billing system; the
billing system did not need to be adapted to Asterisk.

-- 
Tilghman