[asterisk-dev] Recommendations for using a SIP stack with Asterisk

[Faidon Liambotis]

On 11/13/12 18:57, Mark Michelson wrote:
> I've only answered the portions of your latest reply where you asked
> a direct question since I think the argument has become
> counterproductive and I'd like to move towards a solution.

Indeed. I feel like I'm participating in an already lost argument.

> I don't want to argue semantics on the Internet because it doesn't
> move us any closer to choosing a SIP stack or determining how we use
> it.What I am interested in hearing is a third option. What I want is
> to find something that gives the Asterisk project the necessary
> control to be able to get fixes to users as quickly as possible, that
> encourages contribution from the Asterisk project to the upstream SIP
> stack, that does not place unnecessary burden on packagers of
> Asterisk, and that does not require users to go to unnecessary
> lengths in order to use the new SIP stack. Does anybody have ideas
> that will satisfy these requirements?

I've been refuting some of your assumptions (e.g. I don't believe
building a library is a "burden" and certainly not unnecessary -- but
let's not repeat those again) and I've being proposing a solution to the
"you want to be in control" corporate problem from my first mail: become
upstream for that SIP library.

One of your three choices, reSIProcate, has already extended you an
invitation to participate in their project before seeing a single line
of code from you and voluntarily participated in a preliminary
discussion on *your* mailing list. Have you even attempted to contact
the people responsible for the other two contenders? Are their replies
going to be a factor in your choice?

Regards,
Faidon