[asterisk-dev] Why are the DAHDI Kernel modules not part of the Kernel?

[François Delawarde]

On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:30 -0500, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> On the release cycle side, if dahdi-linux was part of the upstream
> kernel tree, then all users who are using LTS-type Linux distros would
> be obligated to convince the distro maintainers to backport new DAHDI
> drivers and other changes into their chosen 'old' kernel release. While
> this is certainly possible, it seems like it would just end up making it
> harder for new card drivers (and other significant changes) to end up in
> users' hands. In addition, it would always have to be distributed
> separately as well, for users who are using distros that don't include
> it at all... which means two different release tracks.

Two different release track would indeed solve all those issues, but
would require a few aditional resources.

On the other hand, dahdi's inclusion in Linux would bring quality
insurance for those needing some type of stability proof. Again this
might not be in Digium's best interest (if you want stability
guarantees, just buy a switchvox).

François.