[asterisk-dev] Easy packaging (Was unstable releases)

[Jeffrey Ollie]

On 1/16/08, Daniel Hazelbaker <daniel at highdesertchurch.com> wrote:
>
> I haven't noticed asterisk in Fedora, but if it is that is great.
> But, and I am sure you were not intending this, we cannot expect them
> to keep up with the most recent versions. Like most other software
> they will pick a release that they deem stable and use it until they
> feel like another release is worth repackaging.

That depends on what you mean by "most recent version".  My policy for
the Fedora packages is/will be:

1) Each version of Fedora will stick with the same major version of
Asterisk that it started with - so Fedora 8 will stay with Asterisk
1.4.* until Fedora 8 is EOL.  New major versions of Asterisk (e.g.
1.6) will be introduced into the Fedora development repository when
the first public beta version is released as long as Fedora
development repository isn't under a feature freeze for the next
version of Fedora.

2) I'll try to keep up with the minor versions as fast as I can
(1.4.17 should already be available in your local Fedora mirror).  It
can take a few days for the packages to be built, signed, and pushed
out to the mirrors though.  If there's a serious security problem I
can try and expedite the process.

The Fedora Asterisk packages won't be tracking SVN trunk or SVN
snapshots though - that's just madness waiting to happen.

The major issue that is going to irk people regarding the Asterisk
packages in Fedora is the fact that the Zaptel kernel drivers aren't
available.  That's because Fedora promotes putting kernel drivers
where they belong - in the upstream vanilla kernel (there was a
short-lived experiment with third-party kernel drivers in Fedora but
it's over now).    Digium has discussed getting the Zaptel drivers
into the vanilla kernel but I haven't seen anything come of it yet.
Once the Zaptel drivers are in the kernel I'm sure that many of the
distributions will be happy to build them into the stock kernels.

Jeff