[asterisk-dev] Asterisk 1.8 and MP3 code?

[Philip Prindeville]

  On 8/2/10 1:57 PM, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
> On Monday 02 August 2010 15:02:18 Philip Prindeville wrote:
>>    On 8/2/10 12:50 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 12:24:18PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
>>>>     On 8/2/10 11:25 AM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 12:26:50PM -0500, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
>>>>>> Well, it's Russell's call to make, and he's on vacation today, but
>>>>>> that strategy could certainly work; we could move the 'mpglib' stuff
>>>>>> to our thirdparty repository.
>>>>> That said, I noticed that the Debian package (of asterisk-addons 1.6.2)
>>>>> does not use the system copy of libmpg123 (from mpg123, originally). I
>>>>> guess this is a related issue.
>>>> Anyone else see this as a reason to do out-of-tree builds of certain
>>>> modules?
>>> Asterisk-addons (that is:<= 1.6.2) builds out of tree.
>>>
>>> There are a number of other out-of-tree packages we have to build,
>>> anyway. It has generally worked well.
>>>
>>> It is normally rather trivial to create a simple makefile that will
>>> build a single Asterisk module. If all you want is to build format_mp3.c
>>> out of the Asterisk tree, I don't mind helping you with that.
>> Sorry, I should have been more specific.
>>
>> I'm suggesting that all of the add-ons be distributed as a separate
>> tarball, and that the mechanism to build them out-of-tree be enshrined in
>> the asterisk main tarball as a means to do so.
>>
>> We had a conference call about this a few months ago, and the answer then
>> was "just copy it into the source tree and build it there", which I didn't
>> think was the best of all possible solutions.
> We also suggested that you create your own Makefile and maintain it yourself,
> which is exactly what Tzafrir volunteered to help you do (well, without the
> maintenance).
>

If it's more than just me using it, and the Make infrastructure changes pretty steadily over time, then why not just make it part of the distro?